Should Fighters Need Commanders?

[HaonSyl]

I want a fighter with only one person in it.  I want my Zakus launched from Musai's.  Not this 30 man crew on a space van.  The commander being gone would be a start though.

[Ulzgoroth]

I want a fighter with only one person in it.  I want my Zakus launched from Musai's.  Not this 30 man crew on a space van.  The commander being gone would be a start though.

Surely the commander being gone would be a start in the wrong direction? Seeing as it's the only game factor that represents an important, portable character being present in the inexplicably-humanoid space fighter.

[Droll]

There was one suggestion that involved the ability to exclude certain ship classes from auto commander assignment which partially does what you want.

I also think that fighter crews are too large, though for the 500 ton examples I can understand why at least.

[xenoscepter]

Code: [Select]

Zaku Class Mobile Suit (P)      55 tons       2 Crew       10.3 BP       TCS 1    TH 1    EM 0
917 km/s      Armour 1-1       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 0.5
Maint Life 16.35 Years     MSP 20    AFR 11%    IFR 0.2%    1YR 0    5YR 2    Max Repair 8 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 days    Morale Check Required   

Ion Drive  EP1.00 (1)    Power 1.0    Fuel Use 457.95%    Signature 1.00    Explosion 8%
Fuel Capacity 1,000 Litres    Range 0.7 billion km (9 days at full power)

Gauss Cannon R100-8.00 (1x2)    Range 10,000km     TS: 1,250 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 8.00%     RM 10,000 km    ROF 5       
Beam Fire Control R10-TS625 (1)     Max Range: 10,000 km   TS: 625 km/s     0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Active Search Sensor AS1-R1 (1)     GPS 2     Range 1.5m km    MCR 136.2k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
 - Slow, mostly useless, but it has a two man crew. That's the best I could do, sorry.

[Ulzgoroth]

Code: [Select]

Zaku Class Mobile Suit (P)      55 tons       2 Crew       10.3 BP       TCS 1    TH 1    EM 0
917 km/s      Armour 1-1       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 0.5
Maint Life 16.35 Years     MSP 20    AFR 11%    IFR 0.2%    1YR 0    5YR 2    Max Repair 8 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 days    Morale Check Required   

Ion Drive  EP1.00 (1)    Power 1.0    Fuel Use 457.95%    Signature 1.00    Explosion 8%
Fuel Capacity 1,000 Litres    Range 0.7 billion km (9 days at full power)

Gauss Cannon R100-8.00 (1x2)    Range 10,000km     TS: 1,250 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 8.00%     RM 10,000 km    ROF 5       
Beam Fire Control R10-TS625 (1)     Max Range: 10,000 km   TS: 625 km/s     0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Active Search Sensor AS1-R1 (1)     GPS 2     Range 1.5m km    MCR 136.2k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
 - Slow, mostly useless, but it has a two man crew. That's the best I could do, sorry.

If you went with missile box launchers rather than a Gauss gun you could get down to only the one crew from the engine I think?

[xenoscepter]

Yes, that's true, but a Zaku is a Mobile Suit from the Gundam series. They're armed with Guns, Missile Pods, Energy Axes (Called "Heat Hawks" IIRC) and the like. Building one in Aurora is difficult as the rules of the Gundam Universe are very different. They'd be closer to Medium Vehicles in Aurora than space craft, but all Mobile Suits can be used to fight in space as well, and they do so quite effectively.

So tiny Gauss Cannon it was. The Triple Missile Pod or a Bazooka would cover one or two models of Zaku II, but even still Aurora doesn't model sapce 'mech to space 'mech laser sword duels, so I think it is a lost cause...

[Jorgen_CAB]

I also think that fighter crews are too large, though for the 500 ton examples I can understand why at least.

In my opinion some fighter crews are way too small considering how big and complicated they really are.

All components such as engine, ship control, weapons and sensor controls etc need allot more crew than it currently do. Two people on a missile fighter is WAY too low.

These ships are not "fighter" crafts... they are smallish ships... most of them are thousands of cubic meters in size and can be deployed for days and weeks so they need crew rotation and serving the ships function not only piloting and releasing the weapons.

In my opinion ALL components no matter how small they are should require SOME crew to operate and service them, even box launchers.

[Jorgen_CAB]

I'm not certain where Jorgen is getting 14m^3 from.  The armour calculations in VB assumed 1t=1m^3, which is a perfectly valid way to measure ship size.

You can search the forum if you like but this is old information... the measure of volume is one ton of liquid Hydrogen which is 14 cubic meters, that is the intended true size of the ships. This is where Steve calculate how much space the crew need for living on the ships for example. How much space is needed for Habitats, Passenger modules, ground military unit space requirements etc...


Edit... found a qoute from Steve...
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10099.msg108545#msg108545

A test fighter in my game for example need 30t living space for 20 people for a 3 month deployment operation... it would not be very reasonable to think that 30 cubic meters is anywhere near enough for that. That is what 15 square meters of space to live on roughly.

The bridge of most ships are about 50t which would be about 25 square meters or a 5*5 room, that is VERY small as you need all the equipment in there too... not just the people working there.

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

I'm not certain where Jorgen is getting 14m^3 from.  The armour calculations in VB assumed 1t=1m^3, which is a perfectly valid way to measure ship size.

You can search the forum if you like but this is old information... the measure of volume is one ton of liquid Hydrogen which is 14 cubic meters, that is the intended true size of the ships. This is where Steve calculate how much space the crew need for living on the ships for example. How much space is needed for Habitats, Passenger modules, ground military unit space requirements etc...


Edit... found a qoute from Steve...
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10099.msg108545#msg108545

Well, this was the first I'd ever heard of it.  I do agree that 'fighters' in Aurora are nothing of the kind.  At 14m^3 per ton I can't even justify calling them PT boats anymore.  Corvettes and frigates is more like it. 

[Jorgen_CAB]

I'm not certain where Jorgen is getting 14m^3 from.  The armour calculations in VB assumed 1t=1m^3, which is a perfectly valid way to measure ship size.

You can search the forum if you like but this is old information... the measure of volume is one ton of liquid Hydrogen which is 14 cubic meters, that is the intended true size of the ships. This is where Steve calculate how much space the crew need for living on the ships for example. How much space is needed for Habitats, Passenger modules, ground military unit space requirements etc...


Edit... found a qoute from Steve...
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10099.msg108545#msg108545

Well, this was the first I'd ever heard of it.  I do agree that 'fighters' in Aurora are nothing of the kind.  At 14m^3 per ton I can't even justify calling them PT boats anymore.  Corvettes and frigates is more like it. 

Imagine when your ships hurl dozens of size 1 AMM at something every 5 seconds when this something is about 35m^3 in size...   

[Ulzgoroth]

A test fighter in my game for example need 30t living space for 20 people for a 3 month deployment operation... it would not be very reasonable to think that 30 cubic meters is anywhere near enough for that. That is what 15 square meters of space to live on roughly.

The bridge of most ships are about 50t which would be about 25 square meters or a 5*5 room, that is VERY small as you need all the equipment in there too... not just the people working there.

Submarine crews have been crammed into pretty small spaces for a few months at a time. 1.5 cubic meters per person would certainly be tight, but if you throw in hot-bunking it's probably possible. Well, provided you're ignoring food stores. Three months of preserved food is probably going to put that over the edge.

The bridge is easier - since (small) ships work without a bridge, most of the fundamental control equipment must not be coming out of the bridge tonnage at all.

[Zincat]

I think this really falls into the: "please roleplay it" category. There's no real reason to do anything else, really.

I love Aurora, but I want battleships that are kilometers long. Even using these numbers, as I posted here
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11489.msg134344#msg134344
these ships are far too small for me.

For a battleship, let's assume a small one, 800m long, with a 5x2x1 size proportions (you know, it's not a cigar. In space you do not have the constraints you have for ships on water)... 800x320x160= 40.96 million m^3 at a very bare minimum.
So, that's a 3 million tons warship in aurora... I'll never build that XD

Example of ships with that shape, the mon calamari star cruiser
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/5/5f/Mon_Cal_Firing_Arc.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20091209171208
Or, even though it's bigger, those are more or less the proportions of a Star Destroyer
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/6/61/Star_Destroyer_Blueprint_SWCT.png/revision/latest?cb=20170717123932

Best just roleplay it.
I will say though, I find fighters disproportionately big in aurora, compared to ships. In my favorite sci-fi concepts, I have carries with hundreds of thousand fighters onboard. True motherships. Once again, not going to happen here in aurora XD

[Jorgen_CAB]

A test fighter in my game for example need 30t living space for 20 people for a 3 month deployment operation... it would not be very reasonable to think that 30 cubic meters is anywhere near enough for that. That is what 15 square meters of space to live on roughly.

The bridge of most ships are about 50t which would be about 25 square meters or a 5*5 room, that is VERY small as you need all the equipment in there too... not just the people working there.

Submarine crews have been crammed into pretty small spaces for a few months at a time. 1.5 cubic meters per person would certainly be tight, but if you throw in hot-bunking it's probably possible. Well, provided you're ignoring food stores. Three months of preserved food is probably going to put that over the edge.

The bridge is easier - since (small) ships work without a bridge, most of the fundamental control equipment must not be coming out of the bridge tonnage at all.

Submarines are a pretty good example and even if they are cramped the crew don't live in 1.5 cubic meters... you don't only count their sleeping quarters but all living space on the ship. A fighter and FAC also include all of the working space as well into this space. It also include ALL the space for the equipment, bulkheads, water and life support machinery etc. So perhaps two third or as little as half of the space is actual space for the crew to move around in, tops.

I think I remember that Steve said something a few years ago about using submarines and living space as one of the measurements for the space needed for space ship in Aurora so he clearly have thought this through more than once.

Submarines have allot more space than 1.5 cubic meters for the crew to live and work on, even in a small diesel submarine.

[Jorgen_CAB]

I think this really falls into the: "please roleplay it" category. There's no real reason to do anything else, really.

I love Aurora, but I want battleships that are kilometers long. Even using these numbers, as I posted here
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11489.msg134344#msg134344
these ships are far too small for me.

For a battleship, let's assume a small one, 800m long, with a 5x2x1 size proportions (you know, it's not a cigar. In space you do not have the constraints you have for ships on water)... 800x320x160= 40.96 million m^3 at a very bare minimum.
So, that's a 3 million tons warship in aurora... I'll never build that XD

Example of ships with that shape, the mon calamari star cruiser
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/5/5f/Mon_Cal_Firing_Arc.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20091209171208
Or, even though it's bigger, those are more or less the proportions of a Star Destroyer
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/6/61/Star_Destroyer_Blueprint_SWCT.png/revision/latest?cb=20170717123932

Best just roleplay it.
I will say though, I find fighters disproportionately big in aurora, compared to ships. In my favorite sci-fi concepts, I have carries with hundreds of thousand fighters onboard. True motherships. Once again, not going to happen here in aurora XD

There is no problem to role-play things in any way you see fit. Anyone are free to fantasise about their game of Aurora all they like.

Personally I like the sizes of the ships as they are intended so I keep my lore to that.

I think that Starwars and many other sci-fi just have incredible sized for their ships for no real good reasons other than just because, there are no real thought behind why they are the way they are. It become more like a contest in which lore have the biggest ships and that become tiresome quite fast in my personal taste. WH-40k are sort of the end of the spectrum here with their hulking cathedrals in space using VAST open space inside their ships...makes little sense but perhaps cool for cinematic effects. These ships are just meant to be cool and nothing else.

I like the more grounded Aurora style... you can sort of replicate most fiction anyway and that is the beauty of Aurora. Although the flexibility have some limitations and I guess that is necessary.

[Zincat]

I think that Starwars and many other sci-fi just have incredible sized for their ships for no real good reasons other than just because, there are no real thought behind why they are the way they are. It become more like a contest in which lore have the biggest ships and that become tiresome quite fast in my personal taste. WH-40k are sort of the end of the spectrum here with their hulking cathedrals in space using VAST open space inside their ships...makes little sense but perhaps cool for cinematic effects. These ships are just meant to be cool and nothing else.

Eh, I won't contest the fact that WH40k is just trying to look cool

However regarding star wars, I was a fan of the extended universe lore (not the CRAP that disney made afterwards). I even have all the sourcebooks for the pen and paper RPG (which I used to play with friends).

In those, and keep in mind this is basically "official" material before disney came and ruined everything, there was a mission description for the various ship classes, and for battleship it read something like this:

A battleship is supposed to be a force strong enough to lay waste to most "normal" star systems on its own, carry enough troops to mount a credible offensive against a "normal" planent, bombard a "normal" planet into submission, act as a command and control center, carry a full wing of fighters into battle, have enough assorted small ships and shuttles for a variety of situations, and have enough supplies to stay operative for years.

That's a lot to ask from one ship. I would say that being 1km long or more is certainly warranted for all that. And it fits, considering it's literally a galaxy-spanning setting.
Now, I don't want to talk about realism when we're talking about sci-fi. But I don't feel it was for "big for no real reason"
But hey, maybe I'm a bit on the fanboy side of things here 

Sorry, I derailed the thread