Thread: 2300AD: Ship design Clarke Class Explorer

Are you saying it "doesn't work" for 2300AD because of the deck configuration?

The point isn't that there would be any gravity (artificial or otherwise) while the ship was in space. The deck configuration -- like that of the Space Shuttle -- is for when it's landed (or landing) in a gravity well (i.e. a planet).

If you are saying the ship just wouldn't (or couldn't) fly, that seems sort of irrelevant to a discussion of whether it is a proper deck plan for 2300AD. Other (official) deck plans for 2300AD have a similar layout.

In any event, I think it's a nice deck plan.

Originally Posted by atpollard

Such a configuration 'might' work if the VTOL drives on the wings could provide say 0.2G constant acceleration in deep space, making the ship a vertical torchship with moon-like pseudo-gravity. I assume that torchships (constant acceleration to midpoint and deceleration to destination) are beyond 2300AD 'hard science', but I wanted to defend the plausibility of the deep-space aircraft layout for other non-'artificial gravity' applications.

2300AD doesn't have torch-ships. In the game, Stutterwarp is efficient enough (lightyears per day) that no trip takes really long. So even if they oculd build a fuel-efficient torchship, stutterwarp would still be used for everything outside a gravity well.

Originally Posted by atpollard

Obviously, the only advantage over a more traditional design would be aerobraking and atmospheric flight - requiring a very specific pair of worlds at either end of the route to justify the expense and complexity of an airframe.

Stutterwarp ships don't really pick up any delta-v on their voyage. They retain their initial vector from whatever orbit etc they were in. I am guessing - and I won't bother to do the map - that you can compensate much of that by clever positioning before you come out of stutterwarp.

Originally Posted by Krazma

Are you saying it "doesn't work" for 2300AD because of the deck configuration?

Yeah, pretty much.

Originally Posted by Krazma

The point isn't that there would be any gravity (artificial or otherwise) while the ship was in space. The deck configuration -- like that of the Space Shuttle -- is for when it's landed (or landing) in a gravity well (i.e. a planet).

Fair enough, but I don't see ships of this size making landings/take-offs off of planets. The shuttle has a huge fuel requirement to even get into LEO and is far smaller than the Clarke Class Explorer.

Originally Posted by Krazma

If you are saying the ship just wouldn't (or couldn't) fly, that seems sort of irrelevant to a discussion of whether it is a proper deck plan for 2300AD. Other (official) deck plans for 2300AD have a similar layout.

Entirely possible, I personally can't remember seeing a deck plan in an official 2300 AD product but I haven't looked into them in years (and I am not touching another Mongoose product). Even so, it's not unreasonable to assume that product designers opted for a "cool" deck layout instead of something that would "work" even if they understood the problems inherent in space flight.

Originally Posted by Krazma

In any event, I think it's a nice deck plan.

That it is.

Thanks for the comments, by the specs its built from it should be able to take off and land, BIG vtol engines and some aerodynamics... basic lifting body. Reminds me to build the model. She's kind of based on the Prometheus, just went a different way.

Well in space, the interior is zero-g, so its just like the shuttle, its mission profile is planet exploration, so it will spend a fair amount of time planet side, hence the lack of spin sections etc.

The Aconit is a very similiar vessel design wise and a lot less aerodynamic, think of the Nostromo. Big hefty bugger that still can land. In fact I drew the plans and all the others in the new Traveller 2300 book.

Originally Posted by bartmoss

Entirely possible, I personally can't remember seeing a deck plan in an official 2300 AD product but I haven't looked into them in years (and I am not touching another Mongoose product). Even so, it's not unreasonable to assume that product designers opted for a "cool" deck layout instead of something that would "work" even if they understood the problems inherent in space flight.

You may want to check out the Thorez plans, I beleive they appreared in Challenge.


Sorry, that's a wrong assumption and unreasonable, the above statement, I didn't do it because it looked 'cool', maybe you should see the specs. This is supposed to land, survey and go home. I'm part way thru building the model, its its got a fair amount of streamlining, in fact the specs call it a lifting body.
I worked closely with Colin Dunn who wrote the new rules and 2320, so I have a good understanding of the system.

Originally Posted by bartmoss

Awesome deck plan, and I love the logo.

But.

This is not a 2300AD ship.

Why? Because the plans obviously assume artificial gravity, which does not exist in 2300ad.

Thanks, theres no Artificial Gravity, I know that, can't stress enough this is for landing on planets.
Sorry you have got it wrong, I'll find the specs.
So it is a 2300AD ! ship, the Thorez and the Aconit both have no AG, but land on planets.

Anyway:

Ah, found the specs!

http://biomassart.files.wordpress.co.../clarke-v2.pdf

Originally Posted by DEWLine

Not having direct access to all my old 2300 AD stuff at the moment...were any classes of stutterwarp-capables able to safely make planetfall?

Yes Thorez and Aconit are two. You can safely land with a stutterdrive, its not the stutter drive doing the work, reaction drive, rockets etc are. The Stutterdrive is for space/FTL travel.

Under MGT2300AD design rules only a relatively small proportion of the ships tonnage needs to be devoted to thrusters to make and break orbit. The MHD turbine can be modified to run a high bypass jet engine, that converts to a plasma rocket at high altitude. The Clarke's VTOL engines can also be accounted for in the tonnage that is allocated to give the ship VTOL or STOL capability. The MGT2300AD rules also typically include two sets of fuel calculations - one to run the ship during interstellar travel when the MHD turbine is only running the stutterwarp - typically based around how long it would take to travel 7.7 light years, as this is the limit of stutterwarp drives endurance before they explode - and one for a certain number of hours of thruster use - typically calculated based on time to surface and time to orbit for a planet with 1g gravity. You'd therefore see something like "Endurance:2 weeks of operations plus 22 hours thruster use". This fuel tonnage is also often stored in inter-deck tanks, which are often not depicted. Can't say if that's the case here, though.

Stutterwarp in and of itself provides no thrust vector or acceleration, as the ship is effectively teleporting a few hundred yards each time the drive cycles by using an effect based on a macro scale application of the electron tunnelling phenomena. By very rapidly cycling the drive you can jump hundreds of thousands of times per second and thereby achieve FTL travel, even though the ship is actually not moving faster than light.

From a deckplan point of view, I saw this a little while ago as it was being developed. A personal pet peeve of mine is the lack of compartmentalisation seen on many deckplans for interstellar ships. One long corridor, or full width open spaces that a single micrometeorite or a dangerous fire could compromise the whole ship. I prefer to see a few more doors and bulkheads, and on larger ships a couple of routes to and from essential services so if one is out of use there's another way to get from engineering to the sickbay or the bridge. I mentioned this to Middenface and he's upped the compartmentalisation - which makes me happy.

G.

I like it. I have been using the Thorez for my in play ship for years and now at least I have a real 2300AD replacement. Travellers artificial gravity is just too normal for me, I like the alien and odd feel of having to worry about the gravity while on board the ships, in Traveller it is just an enclosed group of rooms, with potted plants and all, but not with 2300AD.
Overall I like the ship and will agree with GJD about the compartmentalization. I think Colin had created a pretty neat and viable cutter or patrol ship some time ago, it had more the feel of the Eagle from Space 1999, but that would be the military for you, the Clark is more of a showpiece with a different mission all together so the look is fine.
Now the Aconit is a different matter, looks like it would be a flying brick, but what do I know, I just look at the pretty pictures.