Jump Ships

As I'm going into more detail about the merchant shiping I have a question:
What would a ship be that could dock ships externaly and take them though FTL?
Thanks
-Stephen

> DracSpy@aol.com wrote:

Tug.

For combat ships, you could also call them Battle Tenders, with the STL ships
being Battle Riders.

In a message dated 99-01-20 21:41:29 EST, you write:

<< Tug.

For combat ships, you could also call them Battle Tenders, with the STL ships
being Battle Riders.

> Okay, this is great. I"m thining a thrust-2 ship that can carry (say)
8 mass
> 33 thrust 4, cargo 20 ships. Just add 4 pulse torps to the "drop

The Islamic Federation tends to use Thrust 1 or 2 tugs (often requisitioned
civilian vessels) to carry their warships. Two Thrust 1 ships are more
efficient (in terms of merchant runs) than on Thrust 2 ship of the same
hauling capacity. IF warships tend to be Thrust 6, no FTL drives, and pretty
dangerous for their mass. See my web page, but ignore the Turcoman missile
variant at the
moment--discovered a serious design defect.

> As I'm going into more detail about the merchant shiping I have a

Yes, build the Jump Ship as a TUG.

> Stuart Ford wrote:

I've been tinkering around with a new type of FTL drive system for my personal
background that works kind of like a TUG drive. The drive belongs to a power
that has just more or less figured out jump drive, but can't build them small
enough to fit in their light warships. Like a tug, these ships extends their
jump fields around smaller ships and carries them through hyperspace. However,
when the ships emerge, they are subject to the same "scatter" rules that ships
coming into real space must go through. This force tends to favor large
capital ships in the first place, believing in "might makes right" rather than
fleet variety.

In a message dated 99-01-21 02:10:44 EST, you write:

<< I've been tinkering around with a new type of FTL drive system for my
personal background that works kind of like a TUG drive. The drive belongs to
a power that has just more or less figured out jump drive, but can't build
them small enough to fit in their light warships. Like a tug, these ships
extends their jump fields around smaller ships and carries them through
hyperspace. However, when the ships emerge, they are subject to the same
"scatter" rules that ships coming into real space must go through. This force
tends to favor large capital ships in the first place, believing in "might
makes right" rather than fleet variety. >> I think that is simular to the J
engines in Star Fire, it could work. How about having "parasite" ships to go
with your Cap ships?
-Stephen

DracSpyn asked:

> As I'm going into more detail about the merchant shiping I have a >
question:
> What would a ship be that could dock ships externaly and take them

A Tug or Tender. FT2 page 27 or FB page 8, depending on which design system
you use.

Regards,

> DracSpy wrote:

> >>
8
> mass 33 thrust 4, cargo 20 ships. Just add 4 pulse torps to the "drop

Sure, no problem. As long as you pay for it in a "bring-and-buy" battle
(even if you don't put it on the table) it's OK - if you use the FT2
design system the tug will be Mass 264 (that's a *HUGE* ship in FT2) and cost
over 1700 points; in the FB it'll be much smaller and cheaper (Mass 77, cost
231 minimum, but then you have *no* defences on the tug whatsoever).

...if you really mean "Mass 33, thrust 4, cargo 20" for the strikeboats,
you'll only be able to give them Fragile hulls - ie, 3 hull boxes each.
I'd give them 19 cargo spaces and Weak hulls instead; 7 hull boxes isn't
exactly much either, but it is a lot better... and you'll still be able to fit
4 pulse torps and 3 HS of FCs and defences.

Later,

In a message dated 99-01-21 17:56:45 EST, you write:

<< >   >>
> Okay, this is great. I"m thining a thrust-2 ship that can carry
 8
> mass 33 thrust 4, cargo 20 ships. Just add 4 pulse torps to the

 Sure, no problem. As long as you pay for it in a "bring-and-buy" battle
 (even if you don't put it on the table) it's OK - if you use the FT2
design system the tug will be Mass 264 (that's a *HUGE* ship in FT2) and cost
over 1700 points; in the FB it'll be much smaller and cheaper (Mass 77, cost
231 minimum, but then you have *no* defences on the tug whatsoever).

This is mostly for the UBW stuff that I'm working on. I figure that it would
be easer to modife the cargo ships than get 2nd hand warships, altho we do
have 17.

...if you really mean "Mass 33, thrust 4, cargo 20" for the strikeboats,
 you'll only be able to give them Fragile hulls - ie, 3 hull boxes each.
I'd give them 19 cargo spaces and Weak hulls instead; 7 hull boxes isn't
exactly much either, but it is a lot better... and you'll still be able to fit
4 pulse torps and 3 HS of FCs and defences.

Yep, trying to keep costs down, this is for mechant shiping, if used in a
battle it would be the same as a q-ship.

Later,

> DracSpy wrote:

[First part of Mark's description snipped; he then continued:]

> Like

> I think that is simular to the J engines in Star Fire, it could work.

Not really - the J drive is completely incapable of making warp
transits, and the Jc drive requires that the carried ships are physically tied
to the carrier, so there's no independent scattering (the carriers do scatter,
of course).

There are no rules for just how to resolve "tugged" jumps in FT, so the
version Mark describes may well be the correct one here :-)

Later,

In a message dated 99-01-21 20:59:25 EST, you write:

<< Not really - the J drive is completely incapable of making warp
transits, and the Jc drive requires that the carried ships are physically tied
to the carrier, so there's no independent scattering (the carriers do scatter,
of course). What I was meaning by the J drive idea is that the ships them
selves have to be carried by another ship. There are no rules for just how to
resolve "tugged" jumps in FT, so the
version Mark describes may well be the correct one here :-) >>
The idea that I got was that the ships were attached to the tug/tender.
In More Thrust there is a scen were there is a tug, you might want to look at
that.
-Stephen