|
|
Post by Minister on Jun 5, 2004 3:37:37 GMT -5
Erm... because the attempts to build ships were working, suposedly, off of one of the GURPS supliments and you're the only one with the books? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 5, 2004 3:51:34 GMT -5
Yes, and I'm trying to get a discussed system by which analogies can be readily made between the two. I believe that the original thread was mired by this problem... So, the quicker that this is solved to offer up guidelines to future 'builders' - regardless of the system used in the Factory - the quicker that we can get back to that!  Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 5, 2004 4:39:45 GMT -5
Here's a suggested (and updated) hierarchy for non-military vessels. - Barge - These have different variants, of course. There's mention of "super-heavy barge", and I reckon there might be something called a "carrier barge" that carries ships without warp drives to other systems. Super-heavy barges are mentioned in Eisenhorn novels (Malleus page 146)
- Freighters - I see this as the standard commercial ship in Warhammer 40,000. The term 'freighter' is pretty common as commercial transport in many sci-fi universes, I believe. There would of course be different types of freighters, depending on their cargo and purpose. Bulk freighters are mentioned in Eisenhorn novels (Xenos page 99)
- Clipper - Clippers in the 19th century were very fast sailing ships, so it seems appropriate for them to be maybe the same size of freighters, or smaller, but much faster. Bulk clippers are mentioned in Eisenhorn novels (Xenos page 76)
- Sprint trader - Probably a small and fast ship, judging by the name. Similar to clipper, only smaller, faster and more expensive, perhaps? Sprint traders are mentioned in Eisenhorn novels (Xenos p 99) and in Ravenor (page 229)
- Caravel - According to the Wikipedia encyclopedia, caravels were small three-masted ships used in the 15th century, weighing about 100 tons. It great strengths were economy, speed and agility, which seem apt for the smallest type of warp capable ship.
Now that I look at this, it looks a lot like the hierarchy for military ships Barge = Battleship Freighter = Cruiser Clipper = Frigate Sprint trader = Destroyer Caravel = Corvette But then, I don't really want any Imperial non-military ships to be the size of battleships. That is the point of battleships anyway, as Kage says. To be the biggest ships. A battleship isn't so imposing next to a super-heavy barge if the latter is double the size. So maybe a Barge is more akin to a cruiser, and freighter is the size of an escort-ship. Heavy Barges like "heavy cruisers" and Super-heavy barges are like grand cruisers? |
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jun 5, 2004 5:13:51 GMT -5
I am reminded of the size comparison between oil tankers and aircraft carriers in the modern world. Whilst they can out-mass them by rather a lot, I would bet on the carrier in a fight even if the tanker did have a coupple of guns strapped on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 5, 2004 5:18:56 GMT -5
Indeed, while military vessels are supposed to be big, you can't build them as big as you might otherwise because they also have to be durable. Oil tankers are bigger than carriers but have a tendency to collapse under their own intertia and bulk. (Incidentally, I was musing the other day on the idea of converting the largest oil tankers into Bomber Carriers to transport larger aircraft like Vulcans. But that's another topic...)
So I don't object to super freighters being larger than battleships.
|
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 5, 2004 5:36:34 GMT -5
Actually, I do realize that a battleship would be able to take out an unarmed ship twice its size. But I just thought Kage had a good point about battleships being much about a display of power, just like how the largest Titans are intended to strike fear into the hearts of the enemy.
Another point is that a star ship larger than an Imperial battleship is going to be very, very, very expensive. Perhaps unaffordable.
And looking away from the size of super-heavy barges, I assume everything else in my suggestion was acceptable....?
Edit: Perhaps, if you don't agree with what I wrote, you have other suggestions? Do you want the super-heavy barge to be larger than battleships? Much larger? What?
|
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jun 5, 2004 6:03:03 GMT -5
I have reservations about "Freighter" being a class. I see it more of a description, as with "Warship" and so-forth. However, I can't think of any alternative, so...
|
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 5, 2004 6:14:02 GMT -5
Well, the appropriate name for a somewhat large sailing ship built for trade is Galleon, but when I hear that name, I immediately think black powder cannons, gold coins and pirates. The galleon was both a military and a commercial vessel, you see.
In principle, the name clipper or caravel is no better than galleon, but they're just a lot less cliché...
What say you?
|
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jun 5, 2004 7:06:19 GMT -5
I would agree on that one. As I say, I've got no ideas here...
|
|
|
|
Post by Lordof on Jun 5, 2004 16:08:48 GMT -5
Would Cargo ship be any better?
And also i think that there would be another category all together for massive Bulk Freight carriers such as the mentioned ones which are above the size of a Battleship.
And yes such a ship could very easilly pay for itself over a while. Aslong as its owners had it along a high traffic route it would easilly be able to fill itself up.
And I would see such a ship being more empty space with no life support inside so it would be an area where Vacuum suits must be worn.
That would leave large areas being maintained by simply checking the outer hull and making sure any structural supports are intact.
|
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 5, 2004 22:52:04 GMT -5
Would Cargo ship be any better? I personally like freighter better. Do you have a suggestion for the name? Since Battle barges are the size of of battle ships, I think a super-heavy barge could be the size of battleships or bigger, if we want. Yeah, I agree. But you need a lot of 'capital' to buy the ship in the first place. That makes sense. It would definitely make it cheaper. It also reminds me of the cargo ship in Alien (1). Yeah. The ship could just leave its cargo in orbit, to be taken care of by tug boats who take it to the planet itself. Actually, this might be appropriate for all 'bulk' ships. |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 6, 2004 11:15:59 GMT -5
Once again it's good to see forward movement but, reading through the above, occasionally get the sense that the concept of 'size nomenclature' gets confused with the overall function of the vessel. With that said, more food for thought there CELS... Now all we have to do is see average sizes and common ranges in v-displacement, m-displacement and, of course, 'linear length' using CELS' suggeted formula... ;D Kage |
|
|
|
Post by Lordof on Jun 7, 2004 1:10:27 GMT -5
Well the slight problem we have with naming the ship description is that most ships are now just called freighters.
So any name we create will be made up.
So my suggestions are Super Heavy Barges or Collossus Barges.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 8, 2004 2:01:33 GMT -5
Incidentally, just playing around with classification names and thought that I would just post some here... Hmmn... maybe useful, maybe not. Probably just going over old ground. You may, however, find the following site rather interesting: Also: I would really love to see a developed system for the Anargo Fleet, something which could then feed back into the 'fluff' by fan inspiration rather than just sitting here... And there is still that concept of creating 'averages' and 'ranges' of the sizes of the vessels to act as a framework of creation which the BFG material could be integrated into rather than purely defining... Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 8, 2004 23:41:02 GMT -5
Okay. I'm going to post another summary. At this point, I suggest that unless someone has a better suggestion, we use this for now to work out estimates related to size and capabilities (such as volume, linear length, speed, armour, etc) If at a later stage, someone can think of a better name for freighter, it shouldn't be too difficult to merely change the name in our documents. I know that Word (by Microsoft) can do this in about 0.001 seconds Military vessels- Battleship. (Battle Barge) - Grand Cruiser.- Cruiser. Line Cruisers can be upgraded to Heavy Cruisers or Battle Cruisers, with superior armament. - Light Cruiser. (Strike Cruiser) - Frigate.- Destroyer.- Corvette.- Attack craft. (Bombers, fighters, interceptors, assault boats, fighter-bombers, etc.) Non-military vessels- Super-heavy barge. The largest class of non-military ships. No upper limit in size, but usually about the same size of Imperial battleships. (Colossus Barges are the same size, but are used to carry system-ships and space stations through the warp rather than actually transporting cargo themselves) - Heavy barge.- Barge. Comparable in size to Imperial capital ships. - Freighter. (Bulk freighters) - Clipper. (Bulk clippers) - Sprint trader. Typically the same size as clippers, but with greater speed and less cargo space. Used for luxury goods and passengers. - Caravel.- Shuttles. (Cutters, yachts, lighters, etc.) Again, I'm not saying that this is perfect. This is just the best I can think of at the moment. If anyone has a better suggestion, I'm all ears Now.. what about ships that aren't capable of warp travel? Do we have a seperate classification system for those, or do they use the same system? Can there be an Imperial system cruiser? Or a system freighter? Also, what about tug boats and ship tenders? |
|
