Carrier Systems

[Eric R.]

The Foch is just about done all I need now is some imput on the following rules additions for Carrier Systems.

Carrier Spacecraft Systems
Unlike normal Auxcillery Spacecraft Systems, Carrier Spacecraft Systems are much more massive and require more internal space. Thus only ships of size 6 and larger can have Carrier Systems onboard. Further the builder must decided between Auxcillery and Carrier system as a ship can not posses both.

FLIGHTDECK
SU: cost 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored
Unlike a shuttle bay a Flight Deck is design for one purpose, launching spacecraft, nothing else. Further the flight deck is where spacecraft are readied for there missions by a large contingent of Flight Deck crew who are organized by their jobs, Launch personal, ordnance and etc. While it is possible for craft to land on the flight deck most recovery operations are carried out on the Recovery Deck.

A typical Flight Deck will be able to accommodate Two-thirds of the carriers full spacecraft complement, usually 80 points worth of spacecraft at one time on large fleet carriers. Further the Flight Deck actually launches by means of power assist devices (called a Catapult though the device is much more complicated) which cost 1 power per craft launched. A Flight deck can launch as many craft as its size, for example a size 6 carrier is capable of launching 6 craft at one time.

A Typical Spacecraft launch Takes 30 minutes from the moment the craft is brought up from the Hanger Deck (which see) to Launch.

A Flight Deck is constructed in the same manner as a Shuttle Bay.

SPACECRAFT FIRE SUPPRESSION & RESCUE SYSTEM
SU Cost: 2 x Size
Power Cost: 3 power/used/round
Due to the nature of Flight operations all Carrier Spacecraft Systems have a self contain Fire Suppression system capable of flooding the entire spacecraft system decks or part of with UHE (Ultra High Expansion) Foam capable of retarding even plasma fires. There is also a larger dedicated system for manually fighting deck fires and for rescue of trapped pilots in crashed spacecraft on the deck. These units are spread through out the various decks. The System requires 3 Power per round when in use. Once a Deck is flooded it remains so until Computer sensors measure that sufficent amounts of heat has been vented or cooled.

HANGER DECK
SU: cost 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored + 10
This is a large deck design for large repair of spacecraft and their general maintenance requirements. It is capable of holding, like the flight deck two thirds the full compliment of the carriers spacecraft. There are also many specialized rooms for specialized repairs, temporary ordnance storage and emergency space for evacuation needs.

A Typical Hanger deck cost 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored + 10. Another function of the Hanger is the refilling of the small deuterium tanks of spacecraft which while allowing long use usually require refilling at least twice during high tempo spacecraft flight operations, usually after 15,000 hours of service. The time required for such operation is usually 15 minutes per size of the ship i.e. a size 2 spacecraft requires 30 minutes to refill.

RECOVERY DECK
SU Cost: 2 x combined Size of ships which can be stored
The opposite of a Flight deck the Recovery deck unlike its Shuttle Bay counterpart is design for non-tractor beam landings. It is the pilots job to land the craft using a multitude of devices such as reverse thrusters, mag locks and even as an emergency arresting wires. The bonus to this is that recovery operations require no power but is the most dangerous operations in all of Starfleet, usually meaning a Spacecraft or Ground Vehicle skill test at a difficulty of 7.

A Hanger deck is usually built to accommodate one half of the Carriers full compliment at one time and can recover 2 craft per every minute of operations. But this is not the only method of figureing out the size of a Recovery Decks for example on larger Fleet carriers such as the Foch Class there are two Recovery Decks which can accommodate one forth of its compliment but can recover four craft per minute.

ELEVATORS
As most of the Decks are located above one another they are connected by a large system of elevators. These elevators can usually at least accommodate a size 1 spacecraft. However large ones on starbases and stations do exist. Its takes one minute per every three decks lifted up and 30 seconds to go down 3 decks.

Each elevator cost 2 SU per 1 Point of Spacecraft lifted at one time, up to a max of 6 points worth of spacecraft (6 SUs). A Typical Elevator such as the four man ones on the Foch can carry either 2 Size one Spacecraft or 1 size 2 Spacecraft. However the Foch also posses two elevators to lift a size 3 spacecraft. Power cost is 1 Power per round used per every 2 points of spacecraft lifted.

I do have plans for a Through Deck System (For ships size 5 - 6) and an Escort "Jeep" Carrier (Size 4 ships) but will come up later with them.


[This message has been edited by Eric R. (edited 01-01-2001).]

[Eric R.]

BTW, we have all been doing nice here not debating the concept of "Carriers in Star Trek" as evidence in the main carrier thread and having some fun so lets keep that up.

[Steve Long]

Well, I am very jazzed to see that you've concocted your own SD supplementary rules, Eric!

Steve Long

[Calcoran]

Sorry for my English ... "jazzed" ... is that good or bad?

[Steve Long]

It's good. It means excited -- "jazzed up," so to speak.

Steve Long

[Old Soldier]

Here's a couple of sytstems you may want to add to your list:

Launch Tubes: SU = 5 x size of largest craft launched. Power = 2 x largest craft launched. Launch tubes require a flight deck and their own independant intertial damper system.

Launch tubes are the starfaring version of the old "wet navy" steam catapault, and are used to launch a large number of fighters in a hurry. This system uses a large magnetic impeller system similar in design to the standard torpedo launcher. A given launch tube can launch up to five fighters per turn (at a rate of 1 fighter per second) until their holding bay is emptied. The standard holding bay will hold up to ten fighters at launch ready status.

Launch tube holding bay
SU = 2 x largest size serviced x number serviced.
power = none

Balcony launch system
SU = (size of carried craft +2) x number of craft.
Power = 1 per craft.

This system requires the use of a flight deck. This is an alternate arrangement for carrage of fighters and similar vehicles on dedicated carriers. In this system, each fighter is launched from its own "bay". The fighters are recovered normally, and are moved into their bays (after being serviced) by an internal crane and gantry system.

This system is capable of launching its entire complement of fighters in a single turn.

------------------
"Any society which is willing to surrender essential liberties in order to gain security, shall in the end have neither."

[Tzeentch]

Why bother with arresting wires and all that 19th century technology when you can use tractor beams to move everything around? Saves space at the expense of power.

[Sarge]

I think you just answered your own question, Tzeentch. What if there's a power failure? Arresting cables would make a very cheap and reliable back up system.

In ST5, I seem to remember a net in the shuttle bay when Sulu crash-landed the shuttle. I also seem to remember a net in a Voy episode, maybe "Barge of the Dead". So I think there's canon evidence that Starfleet won't casually dismiss tried and proven carrier technology just because it's old.

------------------

<<<<

LUGTrek isn't really dead. Not as long as we remember it.

[Tzeentch]

If they can give holodecks their own generators I'm sure the converse is true for the proposed carrier systems. But crashwebs and the like are appropriate since the shuttles don't actually land at all that high a relative speed.

[Eric R.]

While there are shuttles aboard there will be fighters an entirely different beast. The idea was that the Recovery, except in some rear cases, use no power what so ever so that power can be used elsewhere. And as stated the cables are a back up not the main means of stoping, the mag locks are that.

[Delta]

Eric, allow me to go off the subject for a brief question (or maybe not so, depending on you answer).

Will your new class of carrier feature a new class of Starfleet fighters?
By the way, where can I find the stats for the only fighter-class ship Starfleet has, that is mentioned in the Spacedock supplement?

[This message has been edited by Delta (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Steve Long]

By the way, where can I find the stats for the only fighter-class ship Starfleet has, that is mentioned in the Spacedock supplement?

Well, in the soon forthcoming Dominion War Sourcebook, for one. I'm not sure if anyone else has tried doing up a Starship Template for it.

Steve Long

[Tzeentch]

I know I already commented on this but I was flipping through some other books and spotted some things I could use as feedback. I've fixed some of the spelling and reworded a few things inside the "quotes."

CARRIER SPACECRAFT SYSTEMS
Unlike normal Auxilliary Spacecraft Systems, Carrier Spacecraft Systems are much more massive and require more internal space. Thus only ships of Size 6 and larger can have Carrier Systems onboard. Further the builder must decided between Auxilliary and Carrier System as a ship can not posses both.

What was the justification for this exactly? The issue of mass/space should be determined by its SU or Power cost, it seems sort of arbitrary (especially for Spacedock) to say that you simply cannot combine them no matter what.

FLIGHT DECK
SU Cost: 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored
Unlike a shuttle bay a Flight Deck is designed for one purpose, launching spacecraft. Further, the flight deck is where spacecraft are readied for their missions by a large contingent of Flight Deck crew: flight officers, ordnance and other vital personnel. While it is possible for craft to land on the flight deck most recovery operations are carried out on the Recovery Deck.

How is this really any different from an oversized shuttle bay? I'm not sure much of a distinction needs to made between them. Simply note that on carriers the large shuttlebays are referred to as "flight decks" out of respect for naval tradition or something.

A typical Flight Deck will be able to accommodate two-thirds of the carriers full spacecraft complement, usually 80 points worth of spacecraft at one time on large fleet carriers. Further the Flight Deck actually launches by means of power assist devices (called a Catapult) which cost 1 Power per craft launched that turn. A Flight deck can launch as many craft as the ships Size.

For example, a Size 6 carrier is capable of launching 6 craft at one time.

This is a bit confusing. Is there any limit to how big each of those launched ships can be? That is, does a Size 2 fighter take as much time to launch as a Size 1?

A Typical Spacecraft launch Takes 30 minutes from the moment the craft is brought up from the Hanger Deck to the Flight Deck.

This seems extremely long, long enough so that recovered fighters have pretty much zero chance of being put back into the fight. Perhaps use the times for fighter recovery and launch from Star Fleet Battles?

A Flight Deck is constructed in the same manner as a Shuttle Bay.

Another reason to just make it a large shuttlebay.

SPACECRAFT FIRE SUPPRESSION & RESCUE SYSTEM
SU Cost: 2 x Size
Power Cost: 3 power/used/round
Due to the nature of high-volume flight operations all carriers have a self contained Fire Suppression system capable of flooding the entire spacecraft system decks or part of with UHE (Ultra High Expansion) Foam capable of retarding even plasma fires.

I'm assuming this would prevent flight operations from occuring if all your shuttles are foamed in? How did they usually extinguish plasma fires in Star Trek anyways? Venting to space may or may not work. In any case flight decks probably would operate in vacuum (better wear an environment suit!) to help prevent such occurances to start. Wearing a skinsuit and helmet wouldn't be much more encurmbering then modern safety gear worn by flight crews and Star Trek ships would be far easier to work with then modern aircraft.

There is also a larger dedicated system for manually fighting deck fires and for rescue of trapped pilots in crashed spacecraft on the deck. These units are spread through out the various decks. The System requires 3 Power per round when in use.

This is noted in the stats, you probably don't need to say it again. What exactly is this dedicated system for rescueing trapped pilots? Why not use a transporter? Heck you could beam the pilots out of their craft even before the ship itself is recovered. If hes fine you can beam him right back to operations for debriefing!

Once a Deck is flooded it remains so until sensors measure that sufficient amounts of heat has been vented or cooled.

And what does being flooded do?

In all I don't think this really necessitates a separate system, I can't really think of anything that normal shuttle operations would differ so greatly from that of a flight deck. I assume the SU cost of a shuttlebay includes the necessary safety equipment, as does the ships standard emergency gear (forcefield fire suppression, etc). If there was really a fire hazard it would be best to vent to vacuum to lower the heat point of any material and prevent reflash.

HANGAR DECK
SU Cost: 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored + 10

Just personal note from my GURPS background but 3x Size of stored ships seems adequate for "long term access" representing the maintenance shops, access area around each craft, and support equipment. This area would probably NOT include industrial replicators (buy those separate).

This is a large deck design for repair of spacecraft and their general maintenance requirements. It is capable of holding, like the flight deck two thirds the full compliment of the carriers spacecraft.

Eh? Might want to note that it typically holds that amount.

There are also areas for specialized repairs, temporary ordnance storage and evacuation needs.

A typical hangar deck cost 2 x combined size of ships which can be stored + 10.

You probably don't need to restate this again.

Another function of the Hanger is the refilling of the small deuterium tanks of spacecraft which while allowing long use usually require refilling at least twice during high tempo spacecraft flight operations, usually after 15,000 hours of service. The time required for such operation is usually 15 minutes per size of the ship i.e. a size 2 spacecraft requires 30 minutes to refill.

Huh? What exactly requires a refill during operations? The shuttlecraft tanks or the deutrium tanks themselves? In any case I don't see why the shuttles require all that much deutrium/antideutrium. Mean time between shuttle refuellings are not given but 15,000 hours (625 days!) is plenty of time to do this at stardock if necessary or at other times when not in combat (unless you're fighting constantly without resupply or rest for almost 2 years straight). I think you're trying to get too much conventional carrier operation stuff into this

RECOVERY DECK
SU Cost: 2 x combined Size of ships which can be stored
The opposite of a Flight deck the Recovery deck. Unlike its Shuttle Bay counterpart it is design for non-tractor beam landings.

I would assume they would have tractor beams for non-combat operations. Otherwise trying to pilot a craft into a ship travelling at relativistic velocities would be an accident waiting to happen.

ON the other tentacle I don't see a need to differentiate this from a normal shuttlebay either, just make up rules for Combat Shuttle Operations that make use of the existing facilities.

It is the pilots job to land the craft using a multitude of devices such as reverse thrusters, mag locks and even as an emergency arresting wires.

If you're using wires why not use tractors? And would wires be able to stop a craft with an ISP of several thousand? I assume that these recovereis will be at impulse speeds - and slowing a shuttle from .25c to 0 is going to take more then some arresting wires!

Note that in the show the ship is usually not moving (relative to the shuttle) when it is recovered. Most carriers are probably going to hang back behind the battlelines to launch and recover their strikecraft.

The bonus to this is that recovery operations require no power but is the most dangerous operations in all of Starfleet, usually meaning a Spacecraft or Ground Vehicle skill test at a difficulty of 7.

Ground Vehicle?

A Hangar deck is usually built to accommodate one half of the Carriers full compliment at one time and can recover 2 craft per every minute of operations.

Why is it limited to two craft no matter the size?

But this is not the only method of figuring out the size of a Recovery Decks. For example on larger Fleet carriers such as the Foch Class there are two Recovery Decks which can accommodate one forth of its compliment but can recover four craft per minute.

Why not just get tons of Recovery Decks then? From an efficiency standpoint thats the way to go.

ELEVATORS
As most of the Decks are located above one another they are connected by a large system of elevators. These elevators can usually accommodate a Size 1 spacecraft.

This seems to sort of contradict the later information.

However large ones on starbases and stations do exist. Its takes one minute per every three decks lifted up and 30 seconds to go down 3 decks.

I'm assuming this uses a turbolift style system. With antigrav the only problem is inertia I would imagine.

Each elevator cost 2 SU per 1 Point of Spacecraft lifted at one time, up to a max of 6 points worth of spacecraft (6 SUs). A Typical Elevator such as the four man ones on the Foch can carry either two Size 1 Spacecraft or one Size 2 Spacecraft.

Four man? I assume you mean 4 SU?

However the Foch also posses two elevators to lift a Size 3 spacecraft. Power cost is 1 Power per round used per every 2 points of spacecraft lifted.

[This message has been edited by Tzeentch (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Cmdr Powers]

Like Steve, I'm 'jazzed' as well. This would be a good way to refine the thru-deck carrier aspects of the Akira design. What I would propose to do would be to take the 100 SU shuttlebay system of the Akira and put a combo Flight Deck, Recovery Bay, Launch Tubes (3), and Hangar Bay in that same space. There would be no need for elevators since you would keep everything pretty much on decks 7, 8, and 9. Using 100 SU's to do this 'flight deck' would reduce the total auxiliary complement from 50 down to 15-30 which is more in keeping with the complement described for an Akira in other sources.

Also, don't forget that auxiliary shuttlebay behind the bridge module. Here you'd find the usual Starfleet sort of small shuttlebay for holding shuttlepods and travel pods. This would contradict our friend's suggestion about not mixing flight decks and shuttlebays.

Oh yes! Eric's rules dovetail quite well with my concept of the uprated Akira class!

As for the fighters- Someone tried to design a 'Valkyrie'-class here earlier, but based it on one of FASA's interceptors from the game of the same name. I think the Valkyrie from Star Trek: Invasion is just a one(or two)-man strike fighter that's probably very easily modified from Steve's template for Starfleet Shuttles. Furthermore, I suspect that Steve's Starfleet Attack Fighter (to be revealed in DWS) is of the same lineage. In the Vanguard, the fighter complement is supposed to be 10 SAF's and a pair of Valkyries. The rest of the ship's auxiliaries are the usual run of workbees, shuttles, and perhaps a Danube or Talon class ship for long-range utility work.

All in all, a nice piece of work, Eric. Even with a little Tzeentch tweaking

------------------
"The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank" -Montgomery Scott

[Eric R.]

While most of your argumants are based on the impression that regular Shuttle bays are enough and thus a matter of personal taste I will wiever from arguing with you on that point just long enough to say That for a carrier its spacecraft are considered a weapons system and in a way should be listed under tactical systems rather than in place of Auxillary systems.

The 30 minute launch time is for a cold craft going through required system test and loading. Further in high tempo operations your craft will have to wiat for launch clearance before leaving again. 30 minutes from the moment that a craft lands on the bottom recovery bays till it emerges out of the top launch bays seems resonable. The catapults only need the same amount of power due to the fact each craft engines are also working to launch.