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 07-10-2016, 06:59 PM   #1
GoblynByte
 
GoblynByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Default [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Considering the size (38 yards long) and wide/flat dimensions, what size hull do you think would be most appropriate for the Millennium Falcon? 7 seems too small, but 8 seems to big. What do you think?
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."
GoblynByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 07:14 PM   #2
RyanW
 
RyanW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoblynByte View Post
Considering the size (38 yards long) and wide/flat dimensions, what size hull do you think would be most appropriate for the Millennium Falcon? 7 seems too small, but 8 seems to big. What do you think?
I could be convinced either way. Since it's roughly twice the dimensions of an X-Wing or Y-Wing, but bulkier (that size is all "body" rather than wings and booms), and the fighters probably a largish SM+5, I'd probably go with SM+8.

Also, there's "Stubby cylinders, teardrops, saucers, and other more complex shapes average about 50%-75% of this length." (Spaceships, p 9, emphasis added)
__________________
RyanW
My name is spelled without a B. Like Minnesota.
RyanW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 07:18 PM   #3
GoblynByte
 
GoblynByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
Also, there's "Stubby cylinders, teardrops, saucers, and other more complex shapes average about 50%-75% of this length." (Spaceships, p 9, emphasis added)
Very good point. I had extrapolated the size chart out to accommodate the Death Star which, being spherical, qualifies for 50% of the measured size it would normally qualify for its diameter.
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

Last edited by GoblynByte; 07-10-2016 at 07:39 PM.
GoblynByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 08:54 PM   #4
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoblynByte View Post
Considering the size (38 yards long) and wide/flat dimensions, what size hull do you think would be most appropriate for the Millennium Falcon? 7 seems too small, but 8 seems to big. What do you think?
When you have mass numbers available for a fictional spaceship you use those to whatever extent you can. Linear dimensions are just too variable and Spaceships design is all about the mass.

So SM+5 is 30 tons or roughly a maximumally loaded F-15e Strike Eagle and huge amounts of that are external stores that don't compare well to Star Wars fighters that don't use such things.

SM+4 is 10 tons and only about 2 tons less than a light-load F-16. If you look at comaprisons of pilots to fighters in photos and models SW fighters are smaller than F-16s. They actually look more like the size of P-51s and other WWII fighters.

However, only the lightest WWII fighters (the Zero) come in at or under SM+3 or 3 tons/6000 lbs. So WWII fighters are SM+4 as a general rule and I would make SW fighters that size too. Make very large ones like the B-wing be SM+5 if you like.

Go to Spaceships 4 and you'll find SM+4 rules and examples.

Now we don't have total mass figures for the Falcon or even the stock YT-1300 but the stock ship is noted sometimes as carrying 100 tons of cargo. SM+6 is 100 tons so the Falcon can't be that but SM+7 is 300 tons.

So that's the figure I'd use. SM+8 is for substantially larger vessels i.e. up to 1000 tons.

What Traveller calls small ships start as SM+8 but Traveller ships are _huge_. One of their SM+8 100 dTon scout ships would be 500,000 cubic feet or like a 5000 sq,ft house with 10 foot ceilings. Also note that such a vessel would not merely fit inside a rectangle of that volume. It would _fill_ a rectangle of that volume. If the ship wasn't brick-shaped its' external dimensions would be even greater than those of the 5000 sq.ft house.

I know some of this may seem odd but whatever a unit of "SM+" is in the rest of Gurps it is not a measure of linear size here. It really, really is a unit of mass in Spaceships. Do not try and figure Spaceships SM from linear size. It will not only drive you crazy it will give you bad answers too.
paceships..
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 10:54 PM   #5
GoblynByte
 
GoblynByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
Do not try and figure Spaceships SM from linear size. It will not only drive you crazy it will give you bad answers too.
paceships..
For better or worse, though, linear size is the *only* quantified bit of data we have on any given Star Wars vessel. Taken from the only tangible and measurable source that exists: The movie assets (in this case, ship models). Everything else (e.g. the amount of cargo mass a YT-1300 can carry) is apocryphal at best, usually grabbed out of thin air by an author (with the occasional use of real-world analogues, as you suggest with the F-15) or supported by vague and useless statements in the script ("She'll make 0.5 past lightspeed").

Beyond that, the only thing that is important is getting roughly the stuff in the design that appears in the movies. If that means I only get 50 tons of cargo instead of 100 tons, I'm okay with that.
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."
GoblynByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 11:01 PM   #6
GoblynByte
 
GoblynByte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

But, to be fair, I agree with you. Some concessions have to be made beyond simple linear measurement. Which is why I put the Nebulon B frigate at SM+12 and the Star Galleon at SM+14. Both are about 330 yards long, but the Nebulon is a long, spindly design (much of its length being taken up by the boom that goes between the fore and aft structures), and the Star Galleon is a more bulbous design with much of its interior space being dedicated to extremely heavy loads.
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."
GoblynByte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 11:19 PM   #7
spacemonkey
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoblynByte View Post
For better or worse, though, linear size is the *only* quantified bit of data we have on any given Star Wars vessel.
Quote:
The ship is technically a light freighter measuring 111ft in length by 82ft wide. While it is rounded and flat in shape, it measures 26ft high - inclusive of the attached exterior weaponry.
You could also extrapolate from a smaller movie model, which was
Quote:
movie prop replica is 31 inches long, 23 inches wide, just over 7 inches high
A 'full scale' model was made for ESB, but some sources say it was 2/3 of the full size. It weighed 23 tons and was kinda sorta a hovercraft, tho they pumped in compressed air and pulled it with a forklift. The interior wasn't complete/scale though, had to bend over to avoid bumping your head apparently.


Full Scale Falcon Project Jason Scott Martin, the numbers that we are using in order to have everything fit (more or less- the builders added more width to the main hold in TFA) are:
114' long
80'6" Wide (docking ring to docking ring)
spacemonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 02:46 AM   #8
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

Star Wars fans like to argue about the size of the Falcon, because its hard to fit the inside sets inside the outside sets. I would just assign it the size which SS says it should have given its apparent dimensions and shape.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoblynByte View Post
For better or worse, though, linear size is the *only* quantified bit of data we have on any given Star Wars vessel. Taken from the only tangible and measurable source that exists: The movie assets (in this case, ship models). Everything else (e.g. the amount of cargo mass a YT-1300 can carry) is apocryphal at best, usually grabbed out of thin air by an author (with the occasional use of real-world analogues, as you suggest with the F-15) or supported by vague and useless statements in the script ("She'll make 0.5 past lightspeed").
That was true 15 years ago, but then Curtis Saxton, the physicist and Star Wars fundamentalist, got the rights to publish the cannonical books on vehicles in the prequels. So now there are all kinds of numbers with the Lucasarts imprimateur on them.

Whether you think they are interpreting a set of rubber-science movies wisely or not, Curtis Saxton and Mike Wong have done a lot of work to calculate the numbers they use.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 03:31 AM   #9
Phantasm
 
Phantasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On the road again...
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

I use SM +8 for two reasons: 1) that's the size at which you have a four-seat bridge (in the Falcon's case, it's Pilot (Han's seat), Co-Pilot (Chewie's seat), Astrogator (the seat behind Han's), and Comms (the seat behind Chewie's), backed up by the four-man crew Lando had on the Falcon's bridge in RotJ - those weren't just Passenger Seating); and 2) I use SM +5 for X-Wings and Y-Wings, SM +4 for the A-Wings, Delta-7s, and Eta-2s, and SM +6 for the shuttles and B-Wings. The Falcon looks more than a bit larger than the shuttles.

That said, I can see arguments for SM +7, but you have to reconcile the Falcon's four bridge stations with the fact that SM +7 gives you only three stations on the bridge.

(I don't believe in Saxon's numbers, as he gives the A-Wing an acceleration number that can have it hitting the speed of light with an hour's straight acceleration.)
__________________
"Life ... is an Oreo cookie." - J'onn J'onzz, 1991

"But mom, I don't wanna go back in the dungeon!"

The GURPS Marvel Universe Reboot Project A-G, N-Z, and S-Z, and its not-a-wiki-really web adaptation.
Ranoc, a Muskets-and-Magery Renaissance Fantasy Setting

Last edited by Phantasm; 07-21-2016 at 04:22 PM.
Phantasm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 03:33 AM   #10
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: [Spaceships] Hull size of Falcon...

GURPS Spaceships includes the Dark Horse, which is clearly a reference to the Millenium Falcon, and it's SM +8. In Psi-Wars, my meditation on Star Wars, I go with SM+8.

I can see the case for SM +7, as the Falcon is almost as agile as a fighter. SM+7 ships have the same movement modifiers as SM+8, but they're still as close to fighter-scale as you can get without actually being a fighter.
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
spaceships, star wars

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 03:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.