Author Topic: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions  (Read 18546 times)

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #30 on: 07 January 2016, 19:53:00 »
Even though mechs are up to 12 meters tall?  Also, quads should be significantly longer than bipedal designs of the same weight.
Sorry, I should have said 6 meters square and 14.5 meters tall.

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8157
    • Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #31 on: 09 January 2016, 06:32:22 »
That makes sense, we can also imagine that Mech's when travelling between worlds have a kind of lock down position for travelling.



You can imagine that when the Gunsmith for example powers down and is basically preparing for a move its legs lock up and the exposed area slots into the lower leg, so the upper leg and lower leg can meet and it basically squats down somewhat.  tanks have to be prepared for say a road move and i'd assume Mech's have something similar.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs - https://thezhukovau.wordpress.com/

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #32 on: 09 January 2016, 07:56:19 »
When laying out the Manatee's packed cargo bay, I used MegaMek models expanded to about four meters wide.  Of course, I was only using medium and light mechs, so 6 meters wide might be cramped for an assault.  For the Manatee, that's probably not a problem, as they were the first attempts at dedicated mech carriers, explicitly converted from cargo ships.

How wide are those Atlas models you're using?  I'd suggest having at least a meter of clearance on both sides so the mech can turn around in the cubicle.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #33 on: 09 January 2016, 09:06:03 »
I was using the MechWarrior Online art for the rough Atlas. If the 'Mech is 12 metres tall it's about 8.5 metres wide. I'll probably tweak my 'example Atlas' somewhat - but I'm guessing I wont be too far off of the Piranha Games stuff.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #34 on: 09 January 2016, 09:47:18 »
I've noticed the MWO art seems to be wider in general, though I'm not sure why.  If they really are 8.5 meters wide, I'd probably go with 12 meters square for a cubicle.  14-15 meters should still leave enough vertical clearance for an overhead crane.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #35 on: 19 December 2016, 13:34:51 »
Got into gear a bit lately on this.

Here is a WIP.

[Fuel] - [Landing Gear] - [Engine] - [Mechs] - [Fighters]

Union Class DropShip
Canon Dimensions

Warhammer BattleMechs
12 metres tall

Chippewa Fighters
'Gut Feelin' dimensions


Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #36 on: 19 December 2016, 13:38:44 »
Here's the first 'Go' at it.

I didn't think this through much at all - I just wanted to get a mark on the board as a point of comparison.

Mechs and Fighter dimensions unchanged. All DropShip dimensions reduced to 60% original size.

NOTE: Once you've expanded the image/attachment, right click and 'view image in another tab' for easier viewing.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #37 on: 19 December 2016, 19:39:31 »
I don't think the smaller version has enough space for all the people.  Access/loading ramps might be a problem too...

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #38 on: 19 December 2016, 20:57:17 »
Some uneducated numbers I'm throwin' around:

Los Angeles class Sub
Crew: 129
Volume: 7572 m3
59 m3 per person

.55 Volume Union DropShip
Crew: 56
Volume: 5924 m3
106 m3 per person

I think we're in good shape there ... especially considering the submarine volume there is the entire sub, not just the control/crew area.

I'll start eyeballing the ramp/door business ...

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #39 on: 19 December 2016, 21:16:49 »
I've served aboard a Los Angeles class submarine, and I assure you over half of the pressure hull volume goes to just the engine room, and your overall figure appears to include the ballast tanks outside the pressure hull.  I also drew up deck plans for a Manatee down in the Aerospace Design sub-forum, and my guess about the Union is informed by that.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #40 on: 19 December 2016, 21:26:36 »
My submarine volume figure includes everything seen in the image - so there should be plenty of room in the '55%' Union for crew and control.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #41 on: 20 December 2016, 01:28:19 »
Googling around some cutaways ... am I correct in assuming the red portion in the attached diagram is the 'control and crew quarters' portion of the sub?

If so, I have tons of room to still play with in the '55%' Union.


EDIT: oops, forgot attachment ...
« Last Edit: 20 December 2016, 01:59:23 by Bren »

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37418
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #42 on: 20 December 2016, 04:01:35 »
I recommend you check out my Manatee plans before assuming there's "tons" of room.  And don't forget fuel tanks.  Liquid hydrogen is 14 cubic meters per ton.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #43 on: 20 December 2016, 10:45:49 »
In terms of 'tons' I'm just making assumptions based on volume per crew member - in which the 55% union has many times the space as a Los Angeles class.

Fuel should be an easy one to tackle. Going off of the StratOps figure of 71kg per m3:

The canon Union has the volume for 351.58 tons.
Stats figure is 215.00 tons
'55%' Union at the moment has volume for 117.00 tons.

So I have some rejigging to do ... (this might come down to the nitty-gritty ... is the true scientific figure closer to 71kg or the 71.43 figure you gave. I might need all the cm3 I can possibly shave off ...)

kato

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2417
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #44 on: 20 December 2016, 11:12:42 »
is the true scientific figure closer to 71kg or the 71.43 figure you gave. I might need all the cm3 I can possibly shave off ...
The density of hydrogen of course depends on the temperature and pressure. You can find a broad chart and table here. If necessary just use the highest figure : 75.287 kg/m³ at 30 MPa and 48.16 K (2855.74 m³ for 215 tons).

On a side note, technically in construction rules it's not the fuel that weighs that much; it's the - full - fuel tank. If you want to get creative use NASA's figure of 50% add-on weight for liquid containers on spacecraft (regardless of volume!), which pulls you down to 1903.82 m³ for above 215 tons which would include 71,666 kg for the tank itself - at the density of steel that's only a maximum of 12 mm wall thickness (as a sphere, otherwise less).
« Last Edit: 20 December 2016, 11:24:23 by kato »

bluedragon7

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 187
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #45 on: 21 December 2016, 12:57:12 »
I don't think the smaller version has enough space for all the people.  Access/loading ramps might be a problem too...
To me it looks too cramped as well, if the density is a big problem for someone ( it isn't for me) I would rather make it heavier than smaller.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #46 on: 21 December 2016, 14:42:40 »
To me it looks too cramped as well ...

With 2.2m (7.2ft) high levels, I can easily fit three 'decks' at the top of the 55% union. With my very rough geometry the two 'crew and control' sections have about the same volume - and the Union has about half the people.

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #47 on: 21 December 2016, 14:54:46 »
The density of hydrogen of course depends on the temperature and pressure. You can find a broad chart and table here. If necessary just use the highest figure : 75.287 kg/m³ at 30 MPa and 48.16 K (2855.74 m³ for 215 tons).

On a side note, technically in construction rules it's not the fuel that weighs that much; it's the - full - fuel tank. If you want to get creative use NASA's figure of 50% add-on weight for liquid containers on spacecraft (regardless of volume!), which pulls you down to 1903.82 m³ for above 215 tons which would include 71,666 kg for the tank itself - at the density of steel that's only a maximum of 12 mm wall thickness (as a sphere, otherwise less).

Good thinking. If 1900 is all I have to shoot for - I'm in good shape.

bluedragon7

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 187
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #48 on: 21 December 2016, 15:45:53 »
With 2.2m (7.2ft) high levels, I can easily fit three 'decks' at the top of the 55% union. With my very rough geometry the two 'crew and control' sections have about the same volume - and the Union has about half the people.
I was talking about the mech bay, hangars, ramps, chutes etc.
In my opinion you need more space around each unit if you do more than store it as cargo. 

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25058
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #49 on: 21 December 2016, 15:58:33 »
Are you going to include the machine spaces, where the equipment that runs the dropship are housed?

Their squashed on a Union, where engines are but they are there..
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Bren

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 634
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #50 on: 21 December 2016, 16:08:38 »
Sorry Wanger, I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify referencing Caveman's image in post #3?

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25058
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #51 on: 21 December 2016, 21:35:06 »
Sorry Wrangler, I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify referencing Caveman's image in post #3?
I was saying in your schematics of the Union. Your ship should include spaces for the engineering compartment, which engines are linked to.  The ship's life support system and more importantly the powerplant for the entire ship should be taken into account on your schematics.  I refer to spaces like that a machine spaces.  Since not everything is in the "Engine" Room of the ship.
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Amaris Fan Club

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 111
Re: BattleTech Spacecraft Dimensions
« Reply #52 on: 22 December 2016, 16:40:20 »
If you're thinking about spacecraft dimensions then you're probably thinking of drawing deckplans someday, which means that what you're really thinking about is how many little squares on a piece of graph paper equipment of a certain tonnage should take up.

Personally I prefer using the K.I.S.S. method to figure this out (Keep It Simple, Steal from traveller.)

In Traveller a single square is 1.5 by 1.5 meters, with the decks being 3 meters tall.  Each square is 1 ton.  This was based on liquid hydrogen having a volume of about 14 cubic meters, so the 1.5 x 1.5 x 3m decks (living space) plus about 3 meters of deck material worked out well.

It works out well for Battletech too for a couple of reasons; A standard Map Hex is 30 meters wide, and a standard Level is 6 meters tall.  Both numbers divide into 1.5 m cubes nicely.  The tallest battlemechs are also 12 meters tall too, another nice coincidence.  Make each standard deck on a ship 1 level tall and you get 3 meter thick decks with 3 meters of living space above them, with equipment taking up one ton per square.  Even better, you don't have to draw things like plumbing and air ducts, as these are all located within the deck itself.  Larger decks, like those containing battlemech bays should be two or three levels tall, 9 meters is plenty of headspace for small mechs, and any 'mech can fit in a 15 meter tall bay (remember only one of the decks is there, so it's 3 meters of deck material plus  9 or 15 meters of open space above it.)

Under this system things on a standard deck are 1 ton per hex, while a taller deck can hold 2 or 3 tons.  This makes drawing things easy;  a first class cabin is ten tons so it takes up 10 squares, say 5 x 2.  A 'mech bay is 150 tons so it takes up about 75 squares on a 2 level high deck, so call it 10 x 7 squares with 5 squares left over for the bunk space provided for the pilot and tech.

But what about all that extra space for corridors and ramps and galleys that the fluff says takes up most of the volume of these items?  I say just draw it as big as you want.  It's empty space so it doesn't mass much, and BT spacecraft are famously less dense than empty soda cans so go to town with it (Looking at the art dropships seem to have a density of about 80 m3 per ton.)  You can base the additional volume for this space on the ships' description - a small ship with cramped crew cabins probably has a tiny galley with fold-out tables whereas a large liner with 1,000 first class passengers probably has everything from ballrooms to bowling alleys (is zero-g bowling fun?  I wonder...)  This also works out for the empty space in dropships like the Union.  Those ships are used as mobile repair shops as often as transports so it makes sense for the ship to have a huge internal space for the techs to work on the 'mechs. Finally, those immense warships probably have equally immense areas of empty space within them;  the fluff states that the armor consists of multiple layers separated by empty space and it makes sense to put a fair amount of space between the internal equipment too (you don't want an exploding laundry machine taking out the fire control computer do you?)

One last note regarding cargo bays:  These should have a lot of volume, much bigger then their tonnage indicates.  This is because spaceships unlike (water)ships don't sink if you overload them, they just accelerate slower.  It should be perfectly acceptable to load two or three times as much stuff in a cargo bay as it is rated to carry, as long as you recalculate the thrust rating of the engines.  I've never seen that mentioned in the fluff or rules but it probably happens in the "real" BT universe all the time.  After all, a mercenary unit that captures 5 clan omnimechs isn't going to leave them behind because their Leopard is full, they'll stack them in every available open space and then just pray that the ancient ships engines can still manage to reach orbit.
« Last Edit: 22 December 2016, 16:48:05 by Amaris Fan Club »

"My Dear Wife; 
I just met Leutnant Hogarth, the new military aid you sent me.
Ha Ha, very funny.
Love Hanse"

 

Register