Thread: Support Ship Contest

Hi everyone, to me it looks like we have the makings of two contests. One for the Spirian "Wilds Support Ship" and one for the "Fleet Support Ship". When I wrote about the Tarawa I hadn't seen the Leviathan-assault Transport write-up in BARD. This is spot-on to what I was thinking of for a "Marine Support Ship". Oh well, another idea sunk (sorry, I couldn't resist).
DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.
First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and people-power) compared to building another ship.
Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.
I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.
Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the doorstep.
the big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is flexability.
Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there are space-based only.

Eamon, just curious. The jump drives recovered, would these be the two TL-12 J-3 392m3 drives recovered from the Kingdom of Light on Tiniyd??? If so I think I may have to tone down the size of my ship's design. I was picturing a ship about 1200-1500 Tons. Ops!

Eamon, I enjoyed your "Cross-faction Kerfuffle" write up. It reminded me of the TAS and CINETWORK (or as we prefer in our verse "CNN" ...Coalition News Network) write ups.
Roger

Hi Roger

--- On Mon, 29/11/10, roger <> wrote:

>Eamon, just curious. The jump drives recovered, would these be the two
>TL-12 J-3 392m3 drives recovered from the Kingdom of Light on Tiniyd???
>If so I think I may have to tone down the size of my ship's design. I
>was picturing a ship about 1200-1500 Tons. Ops!

Yup, they are - guess I tried to be too true to life in the write-up.

>Eamon, I enjoyed your "Cross-faction Kerfuffle" write up. It reminded me
>of the TAS and CINETWORK (or as we prefer in our verse "CNN" ...Coalition
>News Network) write ups.

I enjoyed writing it too - must have been channelling Dave, Frank or Loren at the time ;)

Eamon

Roger wrote:

DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.

First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
people-power) compared to building another ship.

Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.

I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.

Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member
world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
doorstep.

The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
flexability.

Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
are space-based only.

==================================================

I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
but I haven't checked. You are correct that both ship classes are
unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
the gearheads to answer.

\_/
DED

Well, the question there is whether the *ship* or the *pods* would need to
be streamlined. If the "pod" were in fact capable of getting itself to and
from orbit, you're good. Or, if the pod can get itself down (say with
heat-shields and 'chutes for a orbital drop, ala Apollo capsule returns),
then all you need is a means to get it back up. Would the fueling auxiliary
that I seem to recall the clippers carrying have the capability to bring the
pod up? Or even carry it both ways between orbit and surface?

Jim

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:21 AM, DED <> wrote:

>
>
> Roger wrote:
>
> DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
> Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.
>
> First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
> that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
> other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
> the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
> people-power) compared to building another ship.
>
> Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
> space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
> too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.
>
> I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
> cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
> instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.
>
> Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member
> world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
> would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
> and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
> records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
> volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
> doorstep.
>
> The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
> flexability.
>
> Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
> are space-based only.
>
> ==================================================
>
> I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
> clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
> of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
> cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
> but I haven't checked. You are correct that both ship classes are
> unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
> Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
> given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
> the gearheads to answer.
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>
>

hmmm, the pod could be itself a surface to orbital vessel or the orbital mother to various small craft which could be a work around the problem for the pod-carrier not being able to make it to the surface.  If such a freighter were to be able to carry a number of pods then you may have a really interesting capability.
 
T

--- On Tue, 11/30/10, DED <> wrote:

From: DED <>
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Support Ship Contest
To:
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 9:21 AM

 

Roger wrote:

DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.

First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
people-power) compared to building another ship.

Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.

I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.

Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member
world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
doorstep.

The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
flexability.

Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
are space-based only.

==================================================

I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
but I haven't checked. You are correct that both ship classes are
unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
the gearheads to answer.

\_/
DED

Interesting I didn't think of the heat shield - parachute delivery ... that may make a pod more of a one use system, but the cost effectiveness may be retained is it's intended to be used for years - decades even.  hmmm
T

--- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jim/Mathias <> wrote:

From: Jim/Mathias <>
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Support Ship Contest
To:
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 10:53 AM

 

Well, the question there is whether the *ship* or the *pods* would need to be streamlined.  If the "pod" were in fact capable of getting itself to and from orbit, you're good.  Or, if the pod can get itself down (say with heat-shields and 'chutes for a orbital drop, ala Apollo capsule returns), then all you need is a means to get it back up.  Would the fueling auxiliary that I seem to recall the clippers carrying have the capability to bring the pod up?  Or even carry it both ways between orbit and surface?
 
Jim

 
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:21 AM, DED <> wrote:

 

Roger wrote:

DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.

First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
people-power) compared to building another ship.

Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.

I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.

Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member
world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
doorstep.

The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
flexability.

Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
are space-based only.

==================================================

I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
but I haven't checked. You are correct that both ship classes are
unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
the gearheads to answer.

\_/
DED

Another possibility would be to go with either a heat shield/parachute
system or a dead glider (think space shuttle re-entry) system for getting
the pod down, and an engine system to get back to orbit. That way you only
need fuel for a one-way trip. And you could add the fuel *after* it was on
the ground, so less weight to take down in the first place.

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Tim O'Reilly <> wrote:

>
>
> Interesting I didn't think of the heat shield - parachute delivery ...
> that may make a pod more of a one use system, but the cost effectiveness may
> be retained is it's intended to be used for years - decades even. hmmm
> T
>
> --- On *Tue, 11/30/10, Jim/Mathias <>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Jim/Mathias <>
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Support Ship Contest
>
> To:
> Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 10:53 AM
>
>
>
> Well, the question there is whether the *ship* or the *pods* would need
> to be streamlined. If the "pod" were in fact capable of getting itself to
> and from orbit, you're good. Or, if the pod can get itself down (say with
> heat-shields and 'chutes for a orbital drop, ala Apollo capsule returns),
> then all you need is a means to get it back up. Would the fueling auxiliary
> that I seem to recall the clippers carrying have the capability to bring the
> pod up? Or even carry it both ways between orbit and surface?
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:21 AM, DED <<http://us.mc398.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=>
> > wrote:
>
>
> Roger wrote:
>
> DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
> Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.
>
> First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
> that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
> other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
> the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
> people-power) compared to building another ship.
>
> Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
> space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
> too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.
>
> I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
> cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
> instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.
>
> Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member
> world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
> would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
> and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
> records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
> volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
> doorstep.
>
> The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
> flexability.
>
> Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
> are space-based only.
>
> ==================================================
>
> I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
> clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
> of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
> cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
> but I haven't checked. You are correct that both ship classes are
> unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
> Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
> given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
> the gearheads to answer.
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Jim,

> Well, the question there is whether the *ship* or the *pods* would
>need to be streamlined.  If the "pod" were in fact capable of getting
>itself to and from orbit, you're good.  Or, if the pod can get itself down
>(say with heat-shields and 'chutes for a orbital drop, ala Apollo capsule
>returns), then all you need is a means to get it back up.  Would the
>fueling auxiliary that I seem to recall the clippers carrying have the
>capability to bring the pod up?  Or even carry it both ways between orbit
>and surface?

Some of the clipper modules in the RCEG book can land on planets, IIRC these are the Quarters Modules - so they can function as lifeboats. So at least some of the quarters modules are streamlined, and can descend from orbit.

The Manta-class fueller that the clippers have are nearly all fuel tank - under normal circumstances I don't think they'd be able to lift anything bulky to orbit.

EAmon

If your pod's contragrav and thrust are actually provided by a tug then you can get it down and get the expensive bits back up for re-use. Or your ship could use a modular cutter with the pod designed to fit.

--- On Tue, 30/11/10, Tim O'Reilly <> wrote:

From: Tim O'Reilly <>
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Support Ship Contest
To:
Date: Tuesday, 30 November, 2010, 18:09

 

hmmm, the pod could be itself a surface to orbital vessel or the orbital mother to various small craft which could be a work around the problem for the pod-carrier not being able to make it to the surface.  If such a freighter were to be able to carry a number of pods then you may have a really interesting capability.
 
T

--- On Tue, 11/30/10, DED <> wrote:

From: DED <>
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Support Ship Contest
To:
Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 9:21 AM

 

Roger wrote:

DED asked about my pod idea and how it would be different from the
Aurora/Maggart class Clippers.

First, the Coalition can't afford many of these ships. Building a pod
that can be dropped, letting the ship return to Coalition space for
other missions while the pod was left behind presents maximum usage of
the ship. Also pods are cheap (in construction time, credits and
people-power) compared to building another ship.

Second, the ship could be used as a freighter in and around Coalition
space. As a salvage ship for bulky items or even small starships, items
too big for even BUFF (see BARD) to carry.

I think the big difference would be the pod would be designed to be
cheap and something that could be left behind as a semi-permanent
instillation, that would argument and support bootstrap operations.

Also I own a copy of "Death of Wisdom" in it a Hiver colony on a member

world is stricken with a disease. I always wondered how the Coalition
would/could respond. Sure they would send doctors, supplies medicines
and support staff. Mercy, on hearing of the outbreak could check its
records for the nearest hospital/research pod. Jump there pick it and
volunteer medical /research personal and drop the pod right on the
doorstep.

The big difference between what I'm thinking of and the Clipper pods is
flexability.

Can a Clipper pod land on a planets surface? I don't know. I think there
are space-based only.

==================================================

I'm no expert on RC ships but in looking at my copy of RCEG, the
clippers have a lot of the same functionality. There's four pages worth
of modules that perform various tasks running from fuel refiinery to
cargo to troop quarters. There might even be more modules over on BARD
but I haven't checked. You
are correct that both ship classes are
unstreamlined so their usefulness is limited to vacuum boneyards.
Perhaps a streamlined version is in order? Not sure if that's possible
given the necessary configuration of the ship, but I'll leave that up to
the gearheads to answer.

\_/
DED