Good idea.
Just glue a bead or other small sphere to the front and call it good.
One design might be three engine cylinders with a small sphere at the front.
Other designs might be a giant cluster of small engines (read
1/16" tubing) fronted by little fiddly bits like little squares (from
plasticard) and maybe some structural tubing (wire)with a small blockhouse
like structure in the middle front for the bridge.
Modern tugs don't have much crewspace - they aren't intended for
extended deployments - you can make two versions, one with a bulkier
superstructure/bridge area for long term deployments and one with
minimal facilities for port/short range tugs.
--Binhan
> -----Original Message-----
> Roger Books wrote:
Given that tugs (even ocean going tugs) are not particulaly large when
compared to warships, and that a Tug is primarily engines, could you get
away with just attatching the bridge-superstructure from a cruiser or
escort to the drive section and leaving it at that?
Regards,
I like that idea. I'll see how to fit things this evening.
Roger
> Matt Tope wrote:
> Roger Books wrote:
Matt:
> Given that tugs (even ocean going tugs) are not particulaly large when
Birhan:
> Modern tugs don't have much crewspace - they aren't intended for
Small 'reality' check. And, usual codicils concerning use of reality apply.
Even ocean going tugs are not usually carrying their charges INTO battle, and
tend to stay away from battle entirely. Also, the FT tugs are transporting all
the way, not pickup a distressed ship and dragging back to nearest safe
harbor.
My foggy remembering of most battle descriptions have warships towing disabled
warships out of battle until they can be met by ocean tugs.
Granted, my carrier/tenders have always been, in my PSB larger than most
folks anyway, but I really think you may be going in too much the opposite
direction. Model it how you will, but the crew on the 'tugs' know they have a
long trip out, and long one home, much of it potentially in harm's way.
Now, if you want to do SFB-style warp packs, knock yourself out, but
that always tended to diminish the cache' of warp to me.
As an aside, in my most battlerider-devoted fleet designs, I never saw
them as the mainstay of a battle fleet. They were always ways of strategically
moving defense forces, and the ratio of tender to rider was very small. My
favorite scenerio designed, but never played, was the tenders bringing the
last of a squadron of 'system defense boats', and being ambushed before while
still detaching the stowed ships.
*shrug* Even for fighter carriers, I assumed that the staging across turns
indicated some time to prep and launch. Much more so for riders.
Sorry I didn't get this in sooner; I f*****d up the setting on my mail client
at home. I can read fine, but seem to be sending directly to the bit bucket.
The_Beast
> Doug Evans wrote:
> Even ocean going tugs are not usually carrying their charges INTO
> My foggy remembering of most battle descriptions have warships towing
I suppose it would be nice to have large, armed tugs for the job in hand, but
how likely is it that a space faring power would put resources into such a
design when they could build a conventional warship instead? Why not just
send in a bare-bones conventional tug with a light escort?
During the Battle of the Atlantic, especially in the early days, the Royal
Navy was so short of dedicated escort craft that Ocean going tugs were
frequently used on the convoy runs. Occasionally they even got to carry out
the role they were intended for, towing crippled ships back to a friendly
harbour, however in such instances the Convoy commander could not afford to
release further escorts to accompany the tg and its charge, leaving them to
head home alone for blighty (or Canada/USA) and run the risk of
encountering
U-Boats, surface raiders and aircraft. So though ideally the standard
"tug"
concept is not the most appropiate vessel to send in harms way "reality" can
often have different ideas. :-)
If I have the battlerider concept understood correctly, tugs tow in larger
non-FTL craft. Given the way FTL works in the Tuffley verse wouldn't the
tugs jump into real space be dispersed anyway, that is to say the ships they
tow would unhitch from the tugs and make way to the redevouze point
independently, leaving the tugs safely out of harms way.
Regards,
> During the Battle of the Atlantic, especially in the early days, the
While this is an example of desperation and not planned fleet design, I'll
accept it.
> I suppose it would be nice to have large, armed tugs for the job in
I imagine the first would be my point, and the second would indicate my
'strategic defense', save you'd need a lot less than one tender/carrier
for each ship in the fleet. To run an attack fleet with less transport than
you have fighting craft seems to invite defeat in detail.
> that is to say the ships they tow would unhitch from the tugs and make
Well, those ships dispersed would individually be subject to being jumped, and
in my view, a tender with carried boat would be far more vulnerable than a
warship alone, but I see we probably disagree on that point.
Otherwise, all in all, we seem to agree.
The_Beast
We were desperate all right...the tugs were heavier escorts, we were also
using armed trawlers!!!
Personally I do agree with you in regards to:
> Well, those ships dispersed would individually be subject to being
I was just trying to envisage the Battle riders concept and apply it to the
tuffleyverse. :-)
I suppose FTL tugs are force multipliers in modern military terminology, thus
targeting and destroying them would have much more long term effect than
destroying the vessels they tow.
However, for myself, I would prefer standard ftl warships, much more flexible!
Regards, Matt Tope.
[quoted original message omitted]