Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-04-2008, 05:52 PM   #21
Adina
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

So the Necho class are not doing astronomical surveys. They are looking for people not planets. In that case you don't need a science array.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
Damage control team of 2 (for the +1), one to each hull section.
Interesting, I hadn't thought about needing a team for each section. I may need to add a couple of ratings. Unless the 2 shuttle pilots are considered to be available for damage control. Depends on if they are Navy or Marine personnel and at what rank.

Thank you for posting this it has helped me to fine tune my own ship. I may use the shuttle design as is.

Jeff
Adina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2008, 09:43 PM   #22
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmurrell
So the Necho class are not doing astronomical surveys. They are looking for people not planets. In that case you don't need a science array.
Just so. In my campaign the Necho class were commissioned in 500 PDT (AD 2903), just when the Survey mission was first getting going. It was only forty years after the end of the Formation wars, and the Empire was just getting its feet under it. Of about eight hundred worlds that were known to have been settled from Earth, only 249 were in contact with the new interstellar community. So there were 500-plus worlds requiring a social survey and diplomatic overtures before Survey even started expanding the frontier of settlement.

As for discovering worlds, I don't know that a science array on a ship is the way to go. If you are in the same system with one (as you might be, with a jump drive or traversing an ancient stargate/wormhole network) you probably don't need it: a telescope, spectroscope and nav/comm gear are probably enough to tell you whether a landing is necessary, and if you aren't, well fixed orbital observatories such a high-tech descendants of the Terrestrial Planet Finder will probably have a planet-detecting range of several hundred light-years.

Quote:
Interesting, I hadn't thought about needing a team for each section. I may need to add a couple of ratings.
Well, you don't actually need a damage control party for each section, though it is nice to have. I had been wondering how to decide how many technicians would be needed for running maintenance, and decided on that as a neat way to settle the question.

Quote:
Unless the 2 shuttle pilots are considered to be available for damage control. Depends on if they are Navy or Marine personnel and at what rank.
I reckon that the shuttle pilots occupy other stations at general quarters, since the shuttles aren't very useful in combat. Of course that means that there is some danger of being caught short of hands if you are surprised with shuttles away. And that argues that damage control is their best combat station, since it is something that you hope to do without anyway.
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.

Last edited by Agemegos; 06-05-2008 at 05:24 PM.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2008, 01:13 AM   #23
fredtheobviouspseudonym
 
Join Date: May 2007
Default Ten tons of small arms?

For 28 landers thats over 300 kilos per.

Boy, you guys must equip like the hero of "The Mummy." Bring every weapon in the catalog and then some.

Even assuming most of the lode is ammunition that's still a LOT of things that go bang!

I'll assume the Colonial Office is adhering to the ancient axiom, "Ammunition will get you through times with no courage a lot better than courage will get you through times with no ammunition."
fredtheobviouspseudonym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2008, 01:46 AM   #24
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: Ten tons of small arms?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredtheobviouspseudonym
For 28 landers thats over 300 kilos per.
What? The armoury?

Quote:
Boy, you guys must equip like the hero of "The Mummy." Bring every weapon in the catalog and then some.
You need a commando battlesuit for each marine. Smallarms. Squad heavy weapons. Anti-armour weapons. Anti-aviation weapons. Stun weapons. A sniper rifle. Smoke grenades. Illumination grenades. Riot gas. A dinosaur rifle. Sentry drones. Patrol drones. Infantry combat drones. Body armour and sidearms for the civilians and Naval officers. A little light body armour for low-threat service. And foam grenades. Lots and lots of foam grenades. There is nothing that a marine can't accomplish with foam grenades.

Then you need equipment to maintain, repair, test, and diagnose it all. And years' supply of ammunition. Cook's voyages lasted three years each.

Quote:
Even assuming most of the lode is ammunition that's still a LOT of things that go bang!
Yeah, but consider that the ship is intended for long cruises, hopping from system to system for years, and often staying for quite a long time on some planets. It will be visiting the widest possible range of inhabitable environments, potentially dealing with every sort of threat, and months away from reloads, spare parts, or a repair shop.

Quote:
I'll assume the Colonial Office is adhering to the ancient axiom, "Ammunition will get you through times with no courage a lot better than courage will get you through times with no ammunition."
No, the Colonial Office is a bunch of limp-wristed pacifistic pantywaists. The Marines adhere to the ancient axiom "No sense in getting killed for a want of being able to shoot back".
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.

Last edited by Agemegos; 06-05-2008 at 05:27 PM.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2008, 05:47 PM   #25
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmurrell
I have a similar exploration ship I am converting that is also SM+9. It is interesting to see the similarities and differences. I should finish it up and post it for comparison.
You should. I would be interested in the comparison, too.
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2008, 07:46 PM   #26
Adina
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
You should. I would be interested in the comparison, too.

Done.

Jeff
Adina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 09:31 PM   #27
Adina
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Double cabin (Buffer and Helmsman)
Could you explain what a buffer is and how is a helmsman different from a pilot?

Jeff
Adina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2008, 12:02 AM   #28
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmurrell
Could you explain what a buffer is
The buffer in a Commonwealth naval vessel is the senior seaman (enlisted person) aboard, with disciplinary and oversight functions, like the sergeant-major in an Army unit or the COB on an USN submarine. I don't know what the US Navy equivalent is on surface vessels.

Quote:
and how is a helmsman different from a pilot?
That depends whether you mean a maritime pilot of an aircraft pilot.

An aircraft pilot has directive control of the aircraft ("the man in the left-hand seat is in command") and actually handles the controls from moment to moment. But on a ship those responsibilities are separated: the conning officer has directive control and issues handling orders. The helmsman, generally an enlisted person rather than an officer, handles the controls. So the difference between a helmsman and a aviation pilot is that a helmsman does not decide where the vessel goes.

A maritime pilot is a local specialist who comes aboard to guide the ship through dangerous waters such as river mouths and shoaling bays. He (or she) is not a permanent member of the ship's complement. When he or she is aboard the pilot either takes the con of the ship (issuing handling orders to the helmsman) or gives advice to the conning officer. So in that sense the difference between a helmsman and a pilot is that a helmsman is a permanent member of the crew and actually handles the controls.

It seems to me that it is clearest to usemaritime terminology with respect to spaceships. To use "pilot" in its aviation sense with respect to a vessel that has a captain and is called a ship might cause confusion, because the word has a different meaning established in that context.
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.

Last edited by Agemegos; 12-04-2008 at 07:59 PM.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2008, 12:39 AM   #29
Diomedes
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
I don't know what the US Navy equivalent is on surface vessels.
That would seem to be a Boatswain's Mate.
Diomedes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2008, 11:25 AM   #30
Adina
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisville, Ky
Default Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ exploration frigate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
The buffer in a Commonwealth naval vessel is the senior seaman (enlisted person) aboard, with disciplinary and oversight functions, like the sergeant-major in an Army unit or the COB on an USN submarine. I don't know what the US Navy equivalent is on surface vessels.
So an informal name for the senior petty officer. On a USN carrier this would be the CMC or Command Master Chief (Petty Officer).

So you are using a naval model with helmsman and conning officer rather than the typical SF model that has both a pilot and a captain for a starship.

Thanks for the clarification. You are usually precise in your terminology and I wanted to be clear on your usage.

Jeff

Last edited by Adina; 07-13-2008 at 04:04 PM.
Adina is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
exploration, flat black, spaceships

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.