- This topic has 37 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We have a shipboard compliment of marines, right? Or was that only for that one mission where we had them recapture bases?
Cadets, DamCon team members, Marines (possibly part of the security you mentioned). Not sure if I can think of anyone else off the top.
Larger quarters for the lower ranks/enlisted might not be a bad idea considering space conservation. We could even go with some rooms with several sets of bunks, almost like a barracks, if we really wanted to. If we can narrow a lot of this down maybe one of us could start working on some floor plans.
As for crew sizes, based on the numbers suggested, I’d say the Battlecruiser would be comparable to a Light Cruiser, maybe 10 or so more based on the slightly larger hull. And I’m guessing a Missile Cruiser and Battleship both might house around 100-120 or so.
There’s probably a fireteam each for the beams and the torpedoes, plus engineering teams running the shields and engines in addition to the roving damcon teams. Each team would probably be led by a non-commissioned officer like a Chief Petty Officer or Warrant Officer. I believe we’ve also had cargo teams standing by to receive various flotsam picked up on missions, too.
From the precedent of previous missions, we don’t normally have marines aboard. The fleet was tasked with carrying a complement of marines each when they needed to be delivered to retake occupied stations in the Cerberus system. This was a specific deviation from the norm. I noticed in particular because space on a scoutship is at an even higher premium than other vessels.
I assume we have combat-trained security teams aboard but not assault marines. Security can defend entry points like the docking bay and transporter room, can provide escort for personnel on away missions, suppress mutiny and insurrection, guard the captain while he sleeps, provide surveillance for the division’s Security Officer, act as bouncers for shipboard parties, carry out floggings until morale improves, be used as ammunition if you run out of civilians, cadets and ensigns… and even double up as DamCon team members during engagements.
Huh, I always thought tube duty went Cadets<Security<DamCom<Ensigns<XO. Civilians are to be excluded from this to keep recruiting numbers up.
We can assure to put the dancing teams that high high on the list? With the rate we naturally lose them, I didn’t think we had baby to spare.
Hey all! Sorry it’s taken a bit for me to come back to this!
Tube duty is a prestigious honor!To be considered ordinance deadly enough to be wielded at an enemy is a compliment to your combat effectiveness! 😛
Back to the subject of the thread;
Matsiyan, I’m not sure whether we have Marines aboard standard or not… Other documentation we’ve had on ship crews has listed Marines as part of the compliment, and last shift the Raven sent a squad of Marines aboard the wreckage of that USF captured TSN vessel to retrieve what they could from it. There was not mention of it being a special case in which we took Marines with us because the mission called for it. However, that doesn’t mean we just always had them aboard, so that has yet to be determined I suppose. I loved how your post went from factual to dry comedy so seamlessly, by the way. 😛
So, if I did my math correctly, with 2 crewmen per quarters we’d need around 48 sets of general quarters. These quarters would have to be 3m wide by 3m long by 2.5m high. The Captain, XO, Chief of Security and Chief Medical Officer would all have their own quarters. And 2-4 guest quarters for the rare instances in which we have VIPs aboard for various missions. So, the interior of the “saucer” would probably be somewhere around 150 meters long, possibly a little more.
Coming back to the replicator subject, in MANY missions we’ve used transporters (or teleporters) to “beam” people aboard and back and forth and such. I understand that this has mainly been used to make the story flow easily, but the goal of this thread is to solidify some concepts for our RP. So, having used transporters extensively in our RP, it seems to be an established technology. My point is: if we have transporters and have the capability to convert the matter of a person into energy, or at least disassemble it, and then reconvert/reassemble them in the same order on the other end, why would we not use the same technology for replicating food and anything else we need aboard ship? It would be more efficient than something along the lines of what we’d talked about using. Or perhaps it is less energy efficient to the point that we don’t use it because of the amount of energy it draws, so we use something less complex and less energy-draining for those purposes and use the transporters because they’re practical for when we use them?
I think layout of the ship would be 3 decks (the two between on the light cruisers would be like jeffrey’s tubes), and on the top deck would be the bridge, Senior Crew Quarters and Guest Quarters, and the loading bay and torpedo tubes. 2nd or Center Deck would be where crew quarters and perhaps the galley and medical bay would be along with primary beams. Finally 3rd/bottom deck would be the brig, armory, and shuttle bay (which I picture being toward the back of the bottom of the saucer, sort of where that “scoop”-looking portion of the bottom of the ship is), and perhaps any science labs that might be appropriate. Engineering would be in the aft section behind the “saucer” and between the impulse engines (nacelles).
I was checking out videos of submarines, and their bunk space for the non-commissioned officers reminded me very much of the rack for fighter pilots in bsg. Just more cramped.
While we probably have the technology to create food matter, it is probably much more efficient to create something edible and nutritious than it is to create something delicious. Hence the many comments about food being of lower quality, as flavor goes.
Are bridge officers all in the same room (the bridge) at the same time during active shift, so we can see each other? What about Engineering? Is the Chief Engineer Officer at the core, like Geordi La Forge (if that even is his role)? What about the others?
some engineers play the part as if they were in the engineering deck some as if there on the bridge, bit like how sometimes geordi did one or the other,
Frankly, I specify my location as Engineer after the fact according to what makes the best story. But if I did something in game that fixed it (like leaping across the bridge to intervene in something) then I would keep it that way for the rest of that piece of story, even if it caused me a problem (could not be present to find out something from DamCon in Engineering).
Going back to food replicators and transporters. I notice that we specify the use of shuttles much more often. Transporters may be available and reliable but I suspect they chew more energy than primary beams and probably require enormous maintenance for reliability (rather like helicopters). The military rely on helicopters for combat very heavily, but the cost is so high that they do not use them frivolously for other purposes.
Maybe it is possible to replicate food using enrgy-to-matter conversion but it is probably prohibitively expensive. But the 3D printing solution may be much lower cost than carrying common food items. Food however is notoriously difficult to synthesize for tatse. It is probably very good, because soldiers mutiny otherwise, but it is an easy thing to gripe about.
Having said which, if we have the technical capability and the energy budget for transporters, then it is very difficult to believe anyone needs to share a room. Though it might be fun to apply that to ensigns and below 🙂
Don’t forget that we only see our own shift. If a ship is out on patrol for any length of time, it would make sense to have three shifts and three crews, both on the bridge and on the lower decks, so that there is round the clock coverage. And if officers share quarters, it might make sense to share with someone who is on a different shift: you meet at change-over time, and go on or off shift, meaning the cabin always has someone in it, but doesn’t necessarily feel crowded.
I find the idea of multiple shifts of the same importance on the same vessel odd. At least, I think that there should be 1 main crew (us) and then 1 or 2 people per station who replace us during our downtime, which can be at anytime the Captain chooses. I also think we only have 1 Captain on board, though I’m not sure about the First Officer.
Also, how long do our missions last? I doubt it’s just a few hours, since that seems like such a great expense.
If I recall, ST used three shifts, with most of the senior officers on the “day” shift, and junior officers taking the less active shifts. The Captain was always on the bridge during that “day” shift, but delegated command to his commanders during the other shifts. It seems like they tried to plan their crucial missions into that “day” shift to use their most experienced crew, or summoned the senior officers to relieve the junior ones in times of crisis.
Considering the small size of our ships compared to those of ST and that we (almost) always dock at a station at the end of our shifts, it could be that we really only have one active crew that goes on missions. This would also explain why we never hear about any other shift’s missions in our briefings.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.