KitK
01/07/11 05:58 PM
128.233.4.60
|
I'm trying to design a dropship...without design software.
So, at the end you have the left over weight that is filled by stuff in bays.
You have to designate bays and each bay's # of doors. But do you have to designate a max weight and or max items for the bay? The sense I get from the tech manual is that the weight and items can float, but descriptions in the Wiki (maybe just fluff) indicate that there are some limits.
Examples:
Bay 1= fighter bay (1 door)
Bay 2 = mech bay (2 doors)
Bay 3 = Cargo (1 door)
ie. put in what ever you want
or
Bay 1= fighter bay (1 door) (4 fighters)
Bay 2 = mech bay (2 doors) (12 mechs)
Bay 3 = Cargo (1 door)
such that you can't bring home those two extra Fireflies (#13, #14) you picked up at MechMart
or
Bay 1= fighter bay (250 tons) (1 door) (4 fighters)
Bay 2 = mech bay (700 tons) (2 doors) (12 mechs)
Bay 3 = Cargo (500 tons) (1 door)
such that you can't swap cargo weight for mech weight to bring home that salvaged Atlas cause it tilts the scale to 755
|
Cray
01/07/11 09:45 PM
97.100.133.59
|
Bays are like weapons and other equipment. They have a single, fixed weight.
A single fighter bay is 150 tons, no more, no less. No additional weight is provided for the fighter; a single fighter of up to 100 tons will fit into the single fighter bay and it will still weigh 150 tons.
A single mech bay is 150 tons. Like the fighter bay, it will hold one 'Mech of up to 100 tons for no extra mass; the bay is treated as 150 tons whether the 'Mech's in it or not.
A single heavy vehicle bay is 100 tons. It will hold a single vehicle of up to 100 tons for no extra weight.
A single light vehicle bay is 50 tons.
etc.
So, say you want to build a Union. You've assigned tonnage for the engines, armor, bridge, fuel and pumps, structure, heat sinks, guns, etc. and now you want to add space for 12 'Mechs and 2 fighters, and after that you have 37.5 tons left. For those units, you need:
12 'Mech bays. That's 12 x 150 = 1,800 tons.
2 fighter bays. That's 2 x 150 = 300 tons.
Any 12 'Mech bays will always be 1,800 tons because of the fixed weight per bay. Any 2 fighter bays will always be 300 tons.
To add a bit of confusion, those individual bays are then (per AT2R/TW) grouped into bigger "bays" for purposes of assigning "launch capable" doors. Per TRO:3057R and later TROs with big spacecraft, these giant bays are grouped solely by vehicle type. So, this example Union might look like:
Bay 1: 12 'Mechs, 4 doors
Bay 2: 2 fighters, 2 doors
Bay 3: Cargo, 37.5 leftover tons, 2 doors
Note the Tech Manual limit on launch-capable doors, 6 plus a few more per tens of thousands of tons. The launch-capable doors determine how rapidly a vehicle can, well, launch 'Mechs or fighters.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
KitK
01/08/11 11:18 AM
71.17.192.22
|
Thanks Cray. That answers some questions and produces a few more.
I finally found the table with this info in it after incompetently searching through Stat Ops, Tact Ops, TW, and TM.
KK
|
Cray
01/09/11 02:39 PM
173.168.112.109
|
Quote:
Thanks Cray. That answers some questions and produces a few more.
The basic bay rules will be in Tech Manual. Tactical Operations won't add much to vehicle bays (except for large, non-space vehicles, allowing things like aircraft carriers), while StratOps will address bays for WarShips, JumpShips and space stations (based on the TM rules).
What other questions do you have?
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
KitK
01/10/11 12:48 AM
71.17.192.22
|
If I ask you all my questions I won't have to do the work! But your help is definately appreciated.
My question has to do with Mechanized Infantry bays only being a fraction of a platoon. So, it looks like to keep the ship flexible in that area I have to plan on Mechanized-Tracked @ 28 max troopers per platoon, thus requiring 6 bays per desired number of platoons times 8 tons. It makes sense because they have vehicles.
And I have to figure out if all the infantry types can be in 1 "Infantry" bay with 1 or 2 doors or if each needs its own. I am trying to move 1 company of an RCT (proportioning out the RCT to its component companies, 3025), so I have a diversity of bays and may run out of doors fast.
Food and water - abstracted into the bay weight?
KitK
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/10/11 12:13 PM
138.162.128.55
|
Unless something changed recently (I.E. TW/TM/TO/SO) Infantry, Vehicular and Cargo bays use "free" doors that do not cost tonnage and are not really tracked, at that point its really up to you and purely fluff considerations for how many Non-Drop Capable doors there are.
Dropping Infantry and Vehicles may be allowed HALO (High Altitude-Low Opening), or HAHO (High Altitude-High Opening) / Military Free Fall (MFF) , ("High Altitude" is still in Atmosphere - or below the interface row on the Space Map, or is it at or below the highest AeroTech 2 Altitude level?) , regular cargo doors would be workable for this.
Battlemech and Fighter bay doors are "Drop Capable" and cost tonnage.
The only Bay doors that are limited are the Drop capable doors, they have a real tactical value and directly affect the game. BattleMechs and Fighters can be dropped in space, or above the interface row on the Space Map.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
01/10/11 04:35 PM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
My question has to do with Mechanized Infantry bays only being a fraction of a platoon. So, it looks like to keep the ship flexible in that area I have to plan on Mechanized-Tracked @ 28 max troopers per platoon, thus requiring 6 bays per desired number of platoons times 8 tons. It makes sense because they have vehicles.
Yep, it's the vehicles that makes them 5 infantry-per-bay instead of 28 (per pg239 TM). Your math on the number of bays looks correct: 28 infantry / 5 infantry-per-bays rounds up to 6 bays. 6 x8 = 48 tons.
Quote:
And I have to figure out if all the infantry types can be in 1 "Infantry" bay with 1 or 2 doors or if each needs its own. I am trying to move 1 company of an RCT (proportioning out the RCT to its component companies, 3025), so I have a diversity of bays and may run out of doors fast.
Yep. See pg155 SO for door limits if you haven't already. You might also check out pg42-44 for unloading times when not using launch-capable doors. You might want to eject 'Mechs and fighters quickly, but infantry can march out on their own time. See pg43 for specifics on infantry platoons.
Quote:
Food and water - abstracted into the bay weight?
No. See Strategic Operations pg44 (for infantry not in quarters, but in bays or cargo holds) and pg155 (for infantry and crew in quarters). Once you figure out your leftover weight for plain cargo and total number of crew and bay personnel, deduct "consumables" (air, food, water) from the cargo. That'll be easier than trying to figure out requirements by bay.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Cray
01/10/11 04:42 PM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Unless something changed recently (I.E. TW/TM/TO/SO) Infantry, Vehicular and Cargo bays use "free" doors that do not cost tonnage and are not really tracked, at that point its really up to you and purely fluff considerations for how many Non-Drop Capable doors there are.
Things have changed, starting in AT2R if not AT2. The doors are still massless, but they figure prominently in launch and landing rules and thus need to be tracked. AT2R put a limit of 6 launch-capable doors per vehicle, but that was violated in a number of TROs so Strategic Operations introduced a tonnage-based limit on the number of doors (page reference supplied in my reply to KitK).
Quote:
Dropping Infantry and Vehicles may be allowed HALO (High Altitude-Low Opening), or HAHO (High Altitude-High Opening) / Military Free Fall (MFF) , ("High Altitude" is still in Atmosphere - or below the interface row on the Space Map, or is it at or below the highest AeroTech 2 Altitude level?) , regular cargo doors would be workable for this.
Nope. You either have launch-capable doors or the infantry/vehicles have to unload slowly using the cargo handling rules. Further, any parachuting infantry has to be of the specialist parachute or jump infantry formats, and the vehicles require the vehicular parachutes and drop pods of Tactical Operations. If you try to shove regular infantry and vehicles out cargo bay doors, then you get lots of metal confetti and tomato splats in various craters.
Quote:
Battlemech and Fighter bay doors are "Drop Capable" and cost tonnage.
No, they've never had tonnage for bay doors.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
KitK
01/11/11 12:46 AM
71.17.192.22
|
Quote:
Yep. See pg155 SO for door limits
From TM 196 I'd say I get 8 doors.
Quote:
No. See Strategic Operations pg44 (for infantry not in quarters, but in bays or cargo holds) and pg155 (for infantry and crew in quarters). Once you figure out your leftover weight for plain cargo and total number of crew and bay personnel, deduct "consumables" (air, food, water) from the cargo. That'll be easier than trying to figure out requirements by bay.
Now this is painful. I figure troops in their bays will cost 4800+ tons of consumables to cover their needs for max days the fuel can carry them. If I allot quarters for them I can save 1000 tons. And I haven't figured in Mechwarriors/techs, aerospace, and vehicle crews. Actually that seems impossible without know what's on board. So, something seems amiss here. I'll have to think on this some more.
KK
|
Cray
01/11/11 08:18 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Now this is painful. I figure troops in their bays will cost 4800+ tons of consumables to cover their needs for max days the fuel can carry them.
How many troops are you carrying in infantry bays, and for how many days?
And don't forget the option of freighters. Not everything has to go into one DropShip.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Edited by Cray (01/11/11 08:19 AM)
|
KitK
01/11/11 11:50 AM
128.233.4.13
|
Yeah a freighter is a good idea. I am getting caught in the details without really knowing space operations and the bigger picture very well (seeing the tree while missing the grandeur of the expansive forest). I did read that troops are usually housed on the larger jump-capable ships not their dropships, only entering the cramped bays when it was time to go. This would alleviate the pressure for consumables quite a lot (200:1 rather than 5-20:1, and it is another ships problem). I should re-figure my fuel needs to match better with the typical time traveled from a jump point to the planet and match the rations to that too. That would save some weight and allow some consumables flexibility via a cargo bay rather than basing it on max travel days values and leaving no wiggle room and pushing the weight off the charts.
I figured a company would have to carry 15 platoons to move its share of a RCT. Perhaps a specialized troop ship is more efficient, but I am shooting for a flexible generalist ship. The hard part is guessing the proportion of heavy and light vehicles and infantry types to allow for. The TM seems to say not to worry about, but I'd already be short 1200 tons (I started at 6000 arbitrarily) if I didn't worry about it.
KK
|
Cray
01/11/11 03:36 PM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Yeah a freighter is a good idea. I am getting caught in the details without really knowing space operations and the bigger picture very well (seeing the tree while missing the grandeur of the expansive forest). I did read that troops are usually housed on the larger jump-capable ships not their dropships, only entering the cramped bays when it was time to go.
Well, in practice there aren't a lot of published ships (JumpShips or DropShips) that have lots of quarters for infantry. Hence SO's discussion of cargo bay conversion into crew quarters. A Mule can hold about 1600 infantry in steerage quarters, plus a bit of cargo.
Quote:
I should re-figure my fuel needs to match better with the typical time traveled from a jump point to the planet and match the rations to that too.
Military DropShips always use 1.84 tons of fuel per day at 1G in strategic movement mode, meaning 100 or more days is pretty light. 100-200 days of fuel also allows un-refueled round trips to and from the planets of most inhabited stars (F class or dimmer). Trying to cut back to 40 days (round trip between the planets of two G2V stars) will limit operations in systems of brighter, bigger stars.
Quote:
I figured a company would have to carry 15 platoons to move its share of a RCT. Perhaps a specialized troop ship is more efficient, but I am shooting for a flexible generalist ship.
You might look to the (TR3075?) Aurora, which has about 600 tons of room that can be (at a shipyard) configured for 4 fighters, 4 'Mechs, infantry, cargo, or mixtures thereof. The US is doing something similar with the F35: 3 configurations on a basic hull to meet the needs of different armed services.
You build the basic hull with engines, armor, guns, heat sinks, fuel, crew, etc. and set aside X thousand tons for bay space. Say this DropShip is an Overlord replacement of about 12,000 tons (to keep the numbers simple for me), so it sets aside about 7,000 tons of bay space.
Version A: carries 36 'Mechs, 6 fighters, 100 steerage quarters (pilots, techs, etc,) and 300 tons of cargo.
Version B: carries 36 fighters, 100 steerage quarters, and 1200 tons of cargo.
Version C: carries 36 heavy vehicles, 250 steerage quarters (vehicle crews), and 350 tons of cargo. Alternately, it can carry 72 light vehicles (hence the excess of bay personnal steerage quarters).
Version D: 700 steerage quarters for 25 platoons, plus 3500 tons of cargo / vehicles.
Version E: 7000 tons of cargo.
Or something like that. Do-all ships are harder than somewhat specialized ships. I have made giant ships that were meant to carry 1/3 of a Davion RCT (meaning: 1 'Mech battalion, 1 heavy vehicle regiment, 5 infantry battalions, plus a bunch of cargo) and it was a 100,000-ton beast. Same for the 1/9th RCT version: still about 45,000 tons, IIRC.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/11/11 06:18 PM
138.162.128.55
|
Quote:
Quote:
Unless something changed recently (I.E. TW/TM/TO/SO) Infantry, Vehicular and Cargo bays use "free" doors that do not cost tonnage and are not really tracked, at that point its really up to you and purely fluff considerations for how many Non-Drop Capable doors there are.
Things have changed, starting in AT2R if not AT2. The doors are still massless, but they figure prominently in launch and landing rules and thus need to be tracked. AT2R put a limit of 6 launch-capable doors per vehicle, but that was violated in a number of TROs so Strategic Operations introduced a tonnage-based limit on the number of doors (page reference supplied in my reply to KitK).
The Section that you quoted delt specificly with the Non-drop Capable Cargo type doors, not Space Drop Capable doors
Quote:
Quote:
Dropping Infantry and Vehicles may be allowed HALO (High Altitude-Low Opening), or HAHO (High Altitude-High Opening) / Military Free Fall (MFF) , ("High Altitude" is still in Atmosphere - or below the interface row on the Space Map, or is it at or below the highest AeroTech 2 Altitude level?) , regular cargo doors would be workable for this.
Nope. You either have launch-capable doors or the infantry/vehicles have to unload slowly using the cargo handling rules.
oops, was not aware that it needed drop capable doors to deploy in atmosphere... i'll have to reread the rules for that...
Quote:
Further, any parachuting infantry has to be of the specialist parachute or jump infantry formats, and the vehicles require the vehicular parachutes and drop pods of Tactical Operations. If you try to shove regular infantry and vehicles out cargo bay doors, then you get lots of metal confetti and tomato splats in various craters.
Any one familiar with the real world would know that paratroopers require training and parachutes (possible exception Jump Infantry... do they already come with HALO training?) and Airborne deployment of vehicles require chutes... its called benefit of doubt 
Quote:
Quote:
Battlemech and Fighter bay doors are "Drop Capable" and cost tonnage.
No, they've never had tonnage for bay doors.
humm, misremembering tonnage based limits? thanks for correction
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
KitK
01/12/11 01:15 AM
71.17.192.22
|
Quote:
Cray: Or something like that. Do-all ships are harder than somewhat specialized ships. I have made giant ships that were meant to carry 1/3 of a Davion RCT (meaning: 1 'Mech battalion, 1 heavy vehicle regiment, 5 infantry battalions, plus a bunch of cargo) and it was a 100,000-ton beast. Same for the 1/9th RCT version: still about 45,000 tons, IIRC.
Yes, I am beginning to see how that could happen. From my first trip through the Tech Manual it seemed relatively easy...I guess it was. Actually trying to put something onboard reveals the short falls. I'd need to quadruple my arbritrary starting weight, so far. It's not so much the equipment as the people. Each mech, vehicle, and fighter has 1 tech; try to bring the whole team on the same ship and now it's 7 per, each needing space and consuables. Infantry is very weight "expensive" to transport. I've managed to account for most of the possible people on board from grunts to doctors and the people literally double the ships weight (before changing engines etc.). I'm looking at 30,000 tons to keep it all on one ship. I'll be wanting more armor and guns to protect a target that juicy.
So, really to get the size under control there has to be a freighter or two, and I should insert a couple of small craft bays in the dropship to ferry consumables during in system flights. OR break it down to a lance per dropship. 27 dropships just feels smarter than 9 30,000 ton ships.
Ack! Bed time.
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/12/11 03:00 AM
166.137.8.218
|
In at2r bay personnel are considred part of the mass of the bay...(Believe this is still the case)... Are you talking about having to get rooms for these crew?... ... Or are you talking about consumables?
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
01/12/11 09:04 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
In at2r bay personnel are considred part of the mass of the bay...(Believe this is still the case)...
Yes, but - as stated at length in this thread - Strategic Operations penalizes the miserable quarters provided in the mass of bays with high consumable (air, water, food) usage. For longer flights, it becomes more mass-efficient to assign bay personnel to their own quarters, which benefit from superior recycling.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Cray
01/12/11 09:06 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
OR break it down to a lance per dropship. 27 dropships just feels smarter than 9 30,000 ton ships.
You should be able to get a battalion and supporting personnel into a 15,000-ton DropShip. What are you currently trying to add to each DropShip?
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/12/11 10:14 AM
138.162.128.52
|
define longer flights...
most transits will be 7 days out to jump point, and 7 days to target, a total of 14 days.
what is the break-even point?
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
KitK
01/12/11 02:58 PM
128.233.63.71
|
Quote:
CP: In at2r bay personnel are considered part of the mass of the bay...(Believe this is still the case)... Are you talking about having to get rooms for these crew?... ... Or are you talking about consumables?
At times this seems a little fuzzy, but yes. (A fuzzy area is support crew. A mech bay should have room for a tech and a mechwarrior, what is fuzzy is the 6 astechs. Really, they could, and maybe likely are, on a different support ship since they won't be needed until after the combat drop. The foolhardy thing I am trying to do is put the astechs on the same ship as the tech.) If I count them as housed in their bay, which seems pretty reasonable, consumables become an issue. Thus, the quote from Cray.
Quote:
Cray: Yes, but . . . Strategic Operations penalizes the miserable quarters provided in the mass of bays with high consumable (air, water, food) usage. For longer flights, it becomes more mass-efficient to assign bay personnel to their own quarters, which benefit from superior recycling.
Housing in their bays cost 1 ton per 20 people. Mechs and fighters are not bad. Vehicles, especially heavy vehicles start to hurt (planning for up to 7 crew, a tech and 6 astechs (14 people per vehicle). Infantry are murder but at least take less tech crews (4 platoons to 1 tech crew). If you move all these folk to their own quarters the consumables cost 1 ton per 200 crew. In the end the savings are not phenomenal, but it is lighter to do so and the ship would be more socially appealing in fluff. This is where I am "crashing and burning" because I am trying to move the people too, instead of just letting that be an abstract detail.
Quote:
CP: define longer flights...
most transits will be 7 days out to jump point, and 7 days to target, a total of 14 days.
what is the break-even point?
That's good information to know, because I am planning consumables for the ship's max range, approximately 200 days. If I really only need consumables for 20-30 days its easy. The people can sit in their bays, and 1800 tons of consumable cargo is way lighter than quarters. Even if the in-system trip is only a few days, who is responsible for food when they sit at recharge station for weeks? I figure you have to be able to plan a several month trip.
How many people am I trying to move? I don't have the exact number handy, but if i remember right my last number was around 1200 people.
rounding a bit:
16 infantry platoons (1 is ship's Marine crew)
...16*30 = 480
...4 tech crews 4*7 = 28
12 battle mechs
...12 warriors
...12 tech crews 12*7 =84
40 vehicles
...light 4*5=20
...heavy 7*5=35 (includes 4artillery vees)
...40 tech crews 40*7 =280 (if there are spots I've gone overboard this has to one)
Medical @ 1 team per 50
..25*5=125
Gunners
...6
Kitchens
...3*3=9
Fighters
...6 pilots
...tech crews 6*7 =42
Ship’s crew 15 (at last count)
I'm at 1136 and missed a couple of things.
The tech manual dropship design steps are more for moving stuff than people. Mechs, fighters, and even light vehicles are pretty easy for pilot, vee gunner, tech (no astechs), ship’s crew. The challenge I unwittingly gave myself was to move the whole RCT, one company per ship, not just the stuff. And doing so is going to require a massive dropship.
|
KitK
01/12/11 03:07 PM
128.233.63.71
|
It just crossed my mind that this newer iteration of Classic BattleTech was aimed at a more holistic approach to combat, so that infantry, planes, and vehicles would have a greater role along side the mechs. One thing that might keep Mechs as the lone Kings of the Battlefield is their relative easy of transport - ie less costly to move (cheaper, smaller ships).
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/12/11 05:48 PM
138.162.128.55
|
Astechs and other laborers and assistants are not included in the "Bay Personnel" statistic only Technician, Armorer, & Mechanic.
Reccomend that you sum up the numbers of Assistant Technicians (AsTechs) and Assistant Mechanics that will be organic to the unit (I.e. actually part of the unit) and at minimum have them occupy an infantry bay.
Note: For the most part, in long term garrison contracts or house units stationed, low level, relatively unskilled personnel such as laborers, Assistant technicians and Assistant Mechanics are hired locally rather than being organic unit personnel. For Combat Units being deployed to areas without a friendly population, Mech, Fighter and Vehicle Transports can be accompanied by infantry transports like the Fury and Gazelle or passenger liners like the Monarch.
Technicans & AsTechs work on BattleMechs and AeroSpace Fighters
Mechanics and Assistant Mechanics (I do not recall ??) would work on Conventional Vehicles
Armorers and Assistant Armorers would work on BattleArmor and both classes of Infantry Weapons (Power Armor mounted and not)
Before the RetCons Surrounding TR3057 & TR3057R and TR3067, iirc Vengance was fluffed in DropShips & Jump Ship (what ever the title of FASA 1619 is) to be accompanied by infantry transports providing transport... Also note, Jump Ships passenger facilities are/were (takes a lot for me to overcome rules/fluff intertia) often fluffed to be used to provide room for dropship personnel to streach their legs or provide expanded living areas. The excalibur was also fluffed to have a "Mech bay" for a lance that was little more than a 400 ton cargo bay and lacked housing or repair equipment (IOW Walk on/Walk Off)... course, all of this last paragraph was retcon with TR3057 & TR3057R and TR3067, etc but serves to give point of origin and why some of the surviving fluff may not seam quite right for the modern stats.
Note: transporting BattleMechs in Cargo Bays doesen't violate the current rules, per se, but Combat Dropping, Repair Facilities and Housing are Amenities that are lost when not using Specific Mech Bays - most of the few ships that were fluffed to do this have been retcon to use specialized transport bays rather than cargo bays fluffed for a specific use.
If a JumpShip is at a recharge facility, then the recharge facility will have Food and housing for the DropShip & JumpShip.
If a JumpShip is recharging during transit, then, for the most part, Food and Facilities are provided on the DropShip for the duration of transit.
Marines are Full crew of the Ship so will be accounted as Ships Crew rather than temporarily accomodated bay Personnel.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
01/12/11 07:51 PM
173.168.112.109
|
Quote:
KitK wrote:
That's good information to know, because I am planning consumables for the ship's max range, approximately 200 days.
Chris's good information is incorrect. 7 days is a crude rule of thumb; many planets offer longer flights. For example, Terra has a 9-day flight to its standard jump points and just slightly brighter stars like an F5 have 15-day transits. The handful of A-class stars impose transits of 3 to 7 weeks. (Refer to Strategic Operation's Transit Time table and compare to the atlases in the free 3025 House Sourcebooks. You can't depend on 7-day transits.)
You should also budget for round trips, not one-way. You can't guarantee the destination will provide for your fuel, food, air, and water. 100 to 120 days is a good rule of thumb for a military operation willing to hedge its bets. You can always trim the consumables if you're going to a dim star with a short transit.
Quote:
I figure you have to be able to plan a several month trip.
Yep.
Quote:
I'm at 1136 and missed a couple of things.
Yep: support units. Who and what hauls the ammo and fuel to the vehicles when they deploy away from the DropShip?
Quote:
The challenge I unwittingly gave myself was to move the whole RCT, one company per ship, not just the stuff. And doing so is going to require a massive dropship.
I'd recommend shifting to specialized variations on one hull. While it's organizationally simple to put 1/9th of an RCT in each DropShip, it's not always tactically wise. Combined arms doesn't always mean the different units fight side-by-side. 'Mechs can deploy into combat where it'd be pure slaughter to deploy infantry, like a hot landing zone. Infantry can deploy into places where it'd be a waste to use 'Mechs, like conducting house-to-house searches or manning road blocks.
Further, it'd streamline your calculations. Right now you're grappling with getting a 1/9th share of everyone (cooks, medics, marines, techs, etc.) into one generic DropShip. By shifting to a specialized design, you'll have an easier time mixing and matching to build an RCT transport unit. Say you design four types (to keep this example simple): variants that can carry 1 'Mech battalion, or 2 tank battalions, or 1000 infantry, or cargo variants. Now you can mix and match to build your force:
1) You need 3 'Mech variants to get your RCT's 'Mech regiment delivered
2) You need 5 tank variants to get your RCT's 3 tank regiments delivered
3) You need 5 infantry variants to get your RCT's 5 infantry regiments delivered
But then you realize, "Crap, I need at least 1000 techs to keep all those 'Mechs and tanks working." With a single, do-all design, you have to redesign the whole DropShip. With the specialist variants, you just add an extra infantry transport to the RCT's roster. It should take a load off your mind.
Quote:
Chris Wrote
Before the RetCons Surrounding TR3057 & TR3057R and TR3067, iirc Vengance was fluffed in DropShips & Jump Ship (what ever the title of FASA 1619 is) to be accompanied by infantry transports providing transport...
You're taking things out of context. Per DropShips & JumpShips, a single Capellan Vengeance, the "Omaha Beach," was used in planetary assaults to deliver 40-odd shuttles full of infantry. Because the Omaha Beach could not transport 40 platoons of infantry (only their shuttles), it was accompanied by infantry transport DropShips (which normally could do the job of landing on the planet on their own but, for unclear reasons, the Capellans wanted a horde-o-shuttles to do the job.)
Other Vengeance-class ships had escorts in the form of assault DropShips and heavy invasion ships because Vengeances were a) rare & precious and b) only used in major attacks. But they were not regularly escorted by infantry transports; that was only the Omaha Beach.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Christopher_Perkins
01/13/11 09:46 AM
138.162.128.53
|
Quote:
Quote:
Chris Wrote
Before the RetCons Surrounding TR3057 & TR3057R and TR3067, iirc Vengance was fluffed in DropShips & Jump Ship (what ever the title of FASA 1619 is) to be accompanied by infantry transports providing transport...
You're taking things out of context. Per DropShips & JumpShips, a single Capellan Vengeance, the "Omaha Beach," was used in planetary assaults to deliver 40-odd shuttles full of infantry. Because the Omaha Beach could not transport 40 platoons of infantry (only their shuttles), it was accompanied by infantry transport DropShips (which normally could do the job of landing on the planet on their own but, for unclear reasons, the Capellans wanted a horde-o-shuttles to do the job.)
Other Vengeance-class ships had escorts in the form of assault DropShips and heavy invasion ships because Vengeances were a) rare & precious and b) only used in major attacks. But they were not regularly escorted by infantry transports; that was only the Omaha Beach.
Ohhh, an excuse to try to read that again despite the fractional status of the book... (rubbing hands) (i.e. a fraction here, a fraction there... gotta love that FASA glue :resigned: )
From Same Book Does it look to you like the Triumph was originally intended to dual purpose its infantry bays for motorized infantry and the Vehicle Crews?
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Karagin
01/13/11 01:43 PM
178.76.138.173
|
Has it ever entered into your thought and process pattern that some things, like the crazy easy it was for the WoB to build up their army and other equally odd ball things are done for flair and excitement and background color? And really do not have anything to do with why some thing was done other then being there for the flavor text to fill in a blank space or write fiat?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
KitK
02/04/11 12:49 PM
128.233.4.118
|
Possibly one of the most critical discussions for me in this thread is the intrasystem travel times. Having looked through the Brief Atlases in the five free downloadable sourcebooks for the Great Houses, it is clear that not a great deal of fuel or consumables is required to attack the majority of key, highlighted planets. The intrasystem fight times range from 2 to days 28, with Oriente being a statistical outlier at 191 days. The TechManual recommended 5-10% of a dropship’s weight be dedicated to fuel, which easily meets the intrasystem travel and combat fuel needs for all of the planets except Oriente (I have to assume at this point that the given planets are proportionally representative of the rest of the Innersphere). Thus, it is consumables that are really the limiting factor to a dropship’s range. The Overlord is a good example. It has 306 tons of fuel for 166.3 days of travel. Of course this should be a bit less because of fuel used in combat mode for launches, landings, and combat. But still, only Oriente is out of reach. On the other hand, the Overlord’s cargo space is only 50 tons. If you fill this space with consumables for the ship’s quartered crew and bay passengers and apply the proper consumption rates, the Overlord’s actual range is only 11 days at a 1G burn. That sounds bad, but it still gets you to 84% of the planets listed in those free sourcebooks. The Union’s range is 22 days, reaching 96% of planets. I had been trying to plan consumables for my ship’s maximum fuel range (200 days), which is clearly a mistake (unless I was targeting Oriente).
Mistake #1: Trying to operate independent of the jumpships.
Because one might not have much choice of jumpship, and because I am skeptical of their cargo space and quarters’ ability to handle large dropships stuffed with infantry (5 regiments in and RCT) over a long interstellar journey, I was trying to make a dropship that could essentially operate independent of jumpships, except for jumping. I had to wrap my head around the idea that dropships are not meant to operate independent of jumpships and that the jumpship has got to re-lade the dropship before it leaves. Getting supplies to the jumpship so it can do this is a separate operation that has to cooridinated, but it can’t be designed into the dropship.
Mistake #2: Planning consumables to match dropship fuel range.
This was wrong for two reasons. First because the range will always be less due to take-offs, landings, coupling with jumpships, launches, and combat. And all those things will vary and result in excess consumables on-board. Second, I was planning for so many days that it was actually lighter to put all the bay personnel in quarters. I finally did the math to see where extra quarters breaks even with leaving people in bays. If you travel more than 155 days it is more efficient to put enlisted persons in 2nd class quarters. If you travel more than 222 days it is more efficient to put officers in 1st class quarters. Steerage is just wasteful, but very useful for the shorter intrasystem flights to pack some extra troops onboard, if you have enough cargo space (not a great option for Overlords or Unions). I also looked at that Transit Time Table. 155 days will get you to (if not to and from) all but the very furthest planets at the brightest stars. So, I am going with 155 days. If the trip is a shorter intrasystem trip, I get a good amount of flexible cargo space, or I can supply the on-planet operation for a while so that the first mission can be military rather than securing the local food service distribution warehouse.
KK
|
Karagin
02/04/11 01:53 PM
217.5.180.114
|
We all have our own opinions of what is right and wrong with the background of the game. Which is a good thing.
I do agree that the food vs fuel issue is one that could be better handled.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Christopher_Perkins
02/06/11 08:39 PM
24.125.16.116
|
food, Water and Oxygen should be better speced out.
life support should have a mass.
if anything, food oxygen should be more than the number of burn days, consider, ships on patrol in-system will spend a lot of time running silent (and coasting without burning fuel) to catch any enemies trying to sneak out or in...
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
02/07/11 08:58 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
food, Water and Oxygen should be better speced out.
It is now spec'd out. Strategic Operations addresses all such consumables in a broad manner that compensates for radically different tech levels and design features in life support.
Quote:
life support should have a mass.
Life support mass is part of quarters and bays, as noted in Strategic Operations. By keeping the life support rules vague, you don't need a dozen pages of life support rules (like GURPS Vehicles 3rd edition) to address differing tech levels and design features in life support.
Quote:
if anything, food oxygen should be more than the number of burn days, consider, ships on patrol in-system will spend a lot of time running silent (and coasting without burning fuel) to catch any enemies trying to sneak out or in...
I agree, but carrying a lot of oxygen is pretty easy. The average adult human uses 2kg of oxygen per day, meaning 1 ton of oxygen will - with CO2 scrubbing - last over a year. With trivial, low tech (1950s) hardware, a lot of the oxygen lost to water vapor (about 1/3 of the oxygen consumed by humans turns to water by the metabolism) can easily be "cracked" to release the oxygen. Such systems have been used on Salyut 7, Mir, and the ISS (submarines use a similar system to get oxygen from seawater). With modestly more advanced equipment and more energy, the exhaled CO2 can also be cracked to release oxygen, too, recovery virtually all oxygen used.
Water recovery is also quite easy. Between dehumidification of air supplies and desiccation (sp) of wastes, it's quite easy to recycle every drop of water on a ship that wasn't a result of respiration.
The last mass to recover are the dry solids sloughed and shit by humans: skin, hair, feces, etc. If you have some sort of food growth system, like the Invader's hydroponics facilities, then you can recycle that last bit of mass and thus shouldn't really need much in the way of new consumables.
In practice, BT's life support systems run the gamut from simple, open-cycle air and non-recycling waste systems (typical of the poor bastards who have to travel in cargo bays) to the light and simple CO2 scrubbing, recycling systems used in non-cargo transport bays to the elaborate recycling systems found in crew and passenger quarters. Strategic Operations reflects this with radical differences in usage rates of consumables:
5 man-days per ton for cargo bays;
20 man-days per ton in transport bays;
200 man-days per ton in quarters.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Christopher_Perkins
02/08/11 03:18 PM
138.162.128.53
|
Quote:
Quote:
life support should have a mass.
Life support mass is part of quarters and bays, as noted in Strategic Operations. By keeping the life support rules vague, you don't need a dozen pages of life support rules (like GURPS Vehicles 3rd edition) to address differing tech levels and design features in life support.
One problem is that for Atmospheric SUV and Extra Atmospheric SUV (q.v. w/Sealing on sealed SUV granted its an accross the board 10% rather than per component ) you get totally different masses... and DropShip Bay Masses match that of the Atmospheric SUV (w/o sealing).
Another problem: The ASF and Fighter Bays work as-is there 50 tons of slack space built in. The Infantry Bays work out because they are infantry bays
Vehicle Bays are messed up.. the Heavy Vehicular Bay should really have an additional mass for the crew, aproximately as much as an Infantry Squad, and a Medium Vehicular Bay should have enough extra mass for 3-4 infantry men.
Small Craft are Similarly messed up with the Maximum Mass of a SC matching the Max Mass of the Bay... Extra Mass for the Crew would work.
If there was additional mass for the Crew on Vehicle Bays & Small Craft Bays, then Life Support could possibly be said to be already incorporated into Bay Mass
Another Issue is that the SUV rules allow for Compartments and Bays... Compartments are For Short Term transport while the Bays are for Long term Barracks like Accomodation (or even 3 levels? Fatigue in hours, Fatigue in Days, Long Term?) this should have been incorporated in the SO update to AT2R.
A Similar Set up should have been done for ships like the Mark VII Landing Craft (DS & JS - Fighter Rules Original) Where Short Term surface to orbit transport of Vehicles and Crew is allowed for.
Best would have Been
Mass for Mech/ASF Bay 100
Mass for Repair Facilities 40
Mass For Drop Chute 0
Mass for Crew (2) w/lifesupport 0.25
Mass for Repair parts 9.75
=========================
150 Tons (as i said, sufficient unspecified mass)
Mass for Vehicle bay 100
Mass for Crew (7+1) w/lifesupport 1
========================
101 Tons (1 ton un accounted for)
and this uses the same mass as the SUV transport Bays for per infantry.... what is the SUV Bay Mass per man for Foot?
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
02/08/11 09:57 PM
173.168.112.109
|
The impression I'm taking away from this conversation, Chris, is that you haven't read Strategic Operations, or you ignored the implications of the life support consumables rules for spacecraft. They answer all your issues posed here. Life support for infantry bays, for cargo bays, for small craft, fatigue, all that was addressed in Strategic Operations.
Quote:
One problem is that for Atmospheric SUV and Extra Atmospheric SUV (q.v. w/Sealing on sealed SUV granted its an accross the board 10% rather than per component ) you get totally different masses... and DropShip Bay Masses match that of the Atmospheric SUV (w/o sealing).
That's a coincidence. The SUV and DropShip construction rules were not compared or in any way adjusted to match each other during the drafting of the support vehicle rules. I was there for the whole review process of SUVs in Combat Equipment Guide and Tech Manual.
Quote:
If there was additional mass for the Crew on Vehicle Bays & Small Craft Bays, then Life Support could possibly be said to be already incorporated into Bay Mass
It is said to be in Strategic Operations. If you can't find the mass, draw from something else on the ship, like the structural mass, which provides for the life support of people living in cargo bays (other than the required consumables mass). People in cargo bays use the most consumables of any passengers.
Quote:
Another Issue is that the SUV rules allow for Compartments and Bays... Compartments are For Short Term transport while the Bays are for Long term Barracks like Accomodation (or even 3 levels? Fatigue in hours, Fatigue in Days, Long Term?) this should have been incorporated in the SO update to AT2R.
This WAS addressed in Strategic Operations. Such quarters have very high uses of consumables, accounting for the effort of compensating for fatigue.
Edited by Cray (02/08/11 10:03 PM)
|
Christopher_Perkins
02/09/11 12:10 AM
24.125.16.116
|
Quote:
The impression I'm taking away from this conversation, Chris, is that you haven't read Strategic Operations, or you ignored the implications of the life support consumables rules for spacecraft. They answer all your issues posed here. Life support for infantry bays, for cargo bays, for small craft, fatigue, all that was addressed in Strategic Operations.
Consumables is one thing... I am talking about the Bay Mass.. Lifesupport equipment mass that should not have been hidden
Did the mass of the
Vehicle Bay (100 or 50, max vehicle mass of 100 0),
Infantry Bay (5 tons - 3 tons troop bay| per man 107 kg men and equipment + 71 kg lifesupport & barracks tonnage)
Small Craft Bay (matches heavest unit of type, no space for crew or lifesupport)
Battle Armor max tonnage of suit is 2 tons, same of bay
Mass of Transport Bay in AT2 matched mass of Fatigue reduced Bay in SUV Rules... I can see the Requirements to avoid Fatigue being increased for Sealed... so the Short term transport bay in Sealed Ships would be the same mass as the long term facilities on a surface vessle... there should be Long Term transport masses.
There should also be a requirement for infantry Platoon bays to house vehicle crew rather than zeroing out the mass of the Vehicle Crew or relying on Average tonnage of vehicles
There Should be a middle Ground of a Long Term Barracks type housing vice individual rooms...
yes i know that the mass of "seperate quarters" is supposed to cover this... but the Key Term is "Seperate Quarters" Seperate Quarters are a luxury in every other science fiction universe... but y'all seam proud that you made them a necessity.
the Mass of the Vehicle Crew Bay described in the Triumph in DS & JS was most definately not intended to be Zero...
Quote:
That's a coincidence. The SUV and DropShip construction rules were not compared or in any way adjusted to match each other during the drafting of the support vehicle rules. I was there for the whole review process of SUVs in Combat Equipment Guide and Tech Manual.
Not a Coincidence, same Source. that which was published before, heck the formatting of the Bay personnel looks the same as in AT2R and Combat Equipment...
you missed the point, however,
Support Vehicles pay 10% of their mass for environmental Sealing & Life Support Equipment if they are Vacuum Capable...
So any equipment or bays mass 1.1 that of non sealed equipment...
5 tons regular bay, 5.5 tons sealed bay
Quote:
It is said to be in Strategic Operations. If you can't find the mass, draw from something else on the ship, like the structural mass, which provides for the life support of people living in cargo bays (other than the required consumables mass). People in cargo bays use the most consumables of any passengers.
good fluff i guess... but it still doesnt account for the Free Tonnage in the Vehcile and Small Craft Bays...
Quote:
Quote:
Another Issue is that the SUV rules allow for Compartments and Bays... Compartments are For Short Term transport while the Bays are for Long term Barracks like Accomodation (or even 3 levels? Fatigue in hours, Fatigue in Days, Long Term?) this should have been incorporated in the SO update to AT2R.
This WAS addressed in Strategic Operations. Such quarters have very high uses of consumables, accounting for the effort of compensating for fatigue.
Not Compensating...
let me try again...
In the SUV Rules,
the Three ton Infantry Compartment Causes Fatigue if you are in it longer than 8 hours
the Five Ton Infantry Bay (which does incorporate life support, interesting) does not.
If the Same Ratio is used, a Bay that did not cause fatigue for space craft would be 8.5 tons for 28 men.
Contrasting that with 140 tons for Luxury Accomodations (A closet of their very own)
Very Bad Form.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
Cray
02/09/11 08:33 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Quote:
The impression I'm taking away from this conversation, Chris, is that you haven't read Strategic Operations, or you ignored the implications of the life support consumables rules for spacecraft. They answer all your issues posed here. Life support for infantry bays, for cargo bays, for small craft, fatigue, all that was addressed in Strategic Operations.
Consumables is one thing... I am talking about the Bay Mass..
[snip]
I am also talking about the bay mass.
The information you're apparently missing is that life support hardware can be extremely light, no more than a few kilograms, or existing life support hardware can easily be pushed to handle many more people if you're willing to stop recycling. The heavy part for such simple or over-burdened life support systems is the consumables. Hence, as I said, Strategic Operations addresses this.
Quote:
Lifesupport equipment mass that should not have been hidden
Awesome. Let's track 2 or 3kg on ships massing thousands of tons. What else needs to be tracked, Chris? Are you also going to track the humidity in the ship's air that can vary ship's mass by hundreds of kilograms? Do you want to track the weight of paint, which can amount to 300kg on something as small as the Space Shuttle's external tank? Hey, let's not forget toilet paper - there's a fatigue-inducing item when it runs low.
Quote:
there should be Long Term transport masses
There is, and it's been explained to you twice already. I'm sorry it's not handled in the way you'd like it, but Strategic Operations addresses fatigue, varying life support masses, and their impact on ship's masses in a way that doesn't devolve into GURPS-like ultra-fine accounting.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Christopher_Perkins
02/09/11 11:55 PM
24.125.16.116
|
I hardly consider Barracks Style Accomodations for 26 Men and 2 small rooms for an other 2 men and full bathroom facilities for the 28 men inaddition to what ever else is required in lifesupport consumables.
When looking at the 3000 kg for the Infantry Transport Compartment vice life support & Barracks facilities in the 5000 kg infantry Transport Bay, the 107 kg per man is the man, the weaponry and other gear with 71 kg per man being furniture and life support.
The Vehicle Bays and Small Craft Bays get a free lunch in that they are not allocated mass for the housing of their crews while Fighters and Mechs have enough slack space to hide the mass for the housing and lifesupport.
you keep referring to Gurps... I do not own any of that stuff
I only care about BattleTech... BattleTech has something that RoboTech did not... Rules that you could use to see if the Writers were following their own rules.
BattleTech used to be something where the designers thought nothing of having a ship statted to transport four BattleMechs in a Bay that was massed at 400 tons because it was walk-off only and the Mechwarrior had to bunk in the crew bays or in a room of his own.
Another Dropship had vehicle bays that were massed at the maximum weight of a vehicle that could fit in them, but had Infantry Bays as barracks accommodations, in addition to light vehicle bays for Mechanized infantry units.
a Few Years later these ships did not survive contact with revisionist writers who think nothing of changing key details of ships that were written before. The Excalibres primary should not have Full Battlemech Bays, they should be Cargo Bays with a 400 ton capacity fluffed to transport Mechs. The Triumph should have an infantry Bay fluffed to be the bay that the Crews of the Heavy Vehicles live in. The Mark VII Landing Craft Should be a AeroSpace Fighter with a Cargo Bay large enough to transport a tank.
Band aids like increasing consumption of supplies on a scale inverted from the mass per man are things that (while being good ideas) do not address the underlying issue of the violation of TANSTAAFL.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
KitK
02/11/11 12:45 AM
71.17.192.22
|
I was tempted at first to think of a bay's weight being related to the weight of the object it held plus space for people, parts, ammo, and I'd buy into life support, too. The problem is tanks don't leave any room.
I'm thinking of a bay as a structure with unique design for holding its object. Keeping a mech upright takes more equipment than it takes to keep a tank from rolling away. Bunks and bathrooms for infantry don't weigh much, so 5 tons. The bay weight is what it takes to contain the object, not how much the object weighs. I'm thinking a mech bay, by itself, weighs 150 tons before you put anything in it.
Now life support, I was surprised that it wasn't a line item at some percentage of the ship's mass. But I don't see it needing to be part of a bay, per se. It would seem that a ship has to have a life support system, whether it is in the accounting or not. Under ideal conditions (quartered crew) the system functions at a high efficency. Bays, not so good. Steerage, terrible. In other words there is only one life support system with which different housing types interface, some better than others.
My 2 cents after skimming the discussion. I think I've finalized my design. Now I have to get it written up.
|
Christopher_Perkins
02/11/11 10:10 AM
138.162.128.55
|
Quote:
I was tempted at first to think of a bay's weight being related to the weight of the object it held plus space for people, parts, ammo, and I'd buy into life support, too. The problem is tanks don't leave any room.
That is precisely why i say that Vehicle Bays and Small Craft Bays Violate There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
BattleMech Bays, Fighter Bays, and Infantry Bays either account tonnage for their personnel, or are abstracted to the point that we can safely assume it to be there.
Quote:
I'm thinking of a bay as a structure with unique design for holding its object. Keeping a mech upright takes more equipment than it takes to keep a tank from rolling away. Bunks and bathrooms for infantry don't weigh much, so 5 tons. The bay weight is what it takes to contain the object, not how much the object weighs. I'm thinking a mech bay, by itself, weighs 150 tons before you put anything in it.
the 150 Ton Mech And Fighter Bays have always or almost always been fluffed to have the Repair Equipment and Mech Drop Equipment or Fighter Launch Equipment. It is unclear if this has always included the Housing Facilities. The Excalibur published in DropShips and Jump Ships at a 400 ton bay for 4 Mechs was Specificly Stated to lack these facilities. the Modern Version that has these facilities for 150 tons per mech or pays 150 tons per mech yet is fluffed to Lack these facilities is possibly a failure in the rules but more likely a Doctrinal epic fail.
Quote:
Now life support, I was surprised that it wasn't a line item at some percentage of the ship's mass. But I don't see it needing to be part of a bay, per se. It would seem that a ship has to have a life support system, whether it is in the accounting or not. Under ideal conditions (quartered crew) the system functions at a high efficency. Bays, not so good. Steerage, terrible. In other words there is only one life support system with which different housing types interface, some better than others.
Life Support is Not accounted Tonnage, this is a fail state, best case would actually be a seperate line item in tonnage and costs HM Aero 2 is not even thought of yet... it needs to be solidified before then.
Life Support is accounted a C-Bill Cost - partial Success
Life Support is accounted at a C-Bill Cost that does not allow for the exclusion of Bay Personnel if the user has opted to put in 5 ton closets for the housing of the bay personnel, so the user gets charged twice for lifesupport in c-bills for "bay personnel" that are granted rooms - if this has been addressed in the rules, perhapse as far back as AeroTech 2 revised, then it is a doctrinal failure that needs to be fixed in HM Aero... if this is something that has not been addressed in the rules yet (each man either charged as Life Support Cost from Bay personnel or for the room, not both). Yes there is the Engineers concept of over building ... but bay personnel are actually getting a 4x buffer if every one else is getting a 2x buffer.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
KitK
02/17/11 10:20 PM
71.17.192.22
|
I've wrapped up the project.
Thanks very much to Chris and Cray for the help and discussion.
It's posted here in the Aerospace discussion area.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 145 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 19133
|
|
|
|
|
|
|