Conventional air transport

[Wolf72]

Opinions needed, using RAW

I have made (MML) a 200t commercial air liner (for lack of better description), how should I handle passenger arrangements?

I can fit in 600 standard extra crew seats at 45 tons, though they are not technically crew.

or I can put in 45 tons of infantry compartments to cover the same idea, although that would only be 10 people per ton for 450 seats. (if you use a full 30 person platoon over a standard 28 person platoon).

at 3/5 with 714 points of fuel, MML says that is 714 turns ... how far does that get you? I could allocate more fuel from my cargo if need be.

[AlphaMirage]

I think seats will be your best choice. It is only a few hours. I'm not certain if the fuel is correct though as I think it is 0.5 point of fuel per thrust point applied for conventional aircraft at Cruise (or 0.75 when moving at Flank Speed). You do have to take drag into account though which will further reduce endurance.

Also have you thought of making it a Small Craft so you can do sub-orbital hops faster than flying in the atmosphere?

[Wolf72]

this is your "SC not available" version.

It is a tech C support vehicle aircraft (w engine rating D), not a conventional fighter ... would that count for fuel consumption difference?

[AlphaMirage]

this is your "SC not available" version.

It is a tech C support vehicle aircraft (w engine rating D), not a conventional fighter ... would that count for fuel consumption difference?

As far as I know, and I've looked at the support vehicle rules recently, I don't think there is a consumption difference. Those are the standard rules in TW Aerospace Movement.

[Dragon Cat]

There's a liner in TRO Support Vehicles that may fit the bill 180 tons only 120 passengers though

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Comet_(Airliner)

[Wolf72]

It's faster and def has more amenities!

If they have 120 passengers, I'm betting they went with the .075 per person seating (the comet would have 9 tons of seating).  So, I'm going to assume that seating is just fine.

Going back to Dragon Cat, I think I bypassed the SC version b/c of not being able to add in seating.  I could only go with Infantry compartments as the smallest transport option.  At 10 to a ton, that is not to bad.  Hmm, hold on a sec.  With the new infantry weights of .085 tons w/o being anti-mech trained (doing math here hold on ...)

I could get 400 people into compartments for 34 tons.  600 people at 51 tons, which is totally doable in a SC. -- guess I'm going to make that too!  With limited cargo, it is not intended for anything except planet-bound travel or maybe to a lunar body or orbiting station or large craft (nothing more than one half of a day! a day, as one day of consumables for that many people in a compartment reaches 30 tons ... oops, compartments are 1 ton per 5 people, that would be 120 tons). 

(it is 6.7 billion c-bills, my support plane comes in at 3.9 billion???!!! -- definitely more multi-role unit if it can hit space and back, and much shorter intra-planetary transit times.



ps: I'm having a feeling of deja-vu with this topic.  I feel like I asked this a few years ago.  My poor brain.  I blame the new update to MM.

[Dragon Cat]

I think the Comet is specifically meant for Civies also it has I think a few 1st class quarters which double as conference rooms and a mini-theater its designed as a not quite but close luxury transport plane. If you're looking for a troop transport you could defiantly shift more I'd think

This one is more military focused

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Longhaul

[Wolf72]

I like that.

I did manage to make an (theoretically) unlimited range, 200t, plane.  Propeller+fusion engine!

[idea weenie]

I'd be tempted to go with Infantry Compartments to reflect that the airliner will be going over 10,000 feet, and you will need some way to make sure the passengers don't pass out due to low atmosphere pressure.

Regular seats might be used if you took Environmental Sealing, though any hole in the aircraft means everyone passes out really quick as there is no supplemental oxygen.

[Wolf72]

I don't think support/CF can hit that high on the altitude map.  10k feet? wait, that's not to bad.  And I'm sure a support/CF is pressurized already.  Not sure how any of that correlates to the how BT uses the altitude map.

So the SC version has the infantry compartments.  But the support vehicle version does not require the same type of infrastructure (for my AU), so my airliner version will stay as is, even if it doesn't have the same level of comfort as the Comet.

[Dragon Cat]

Would you need something that can hit 10k altitude in BT? Most planets are not as densely populated as modern day Earth even, there can't be the massive amount of air traffic we have or the population centres or the regions you can't fly over due to conflict

Sure it's more efficient to fly in the Jetstream if all you're doing is flying one continent to the next or around a mountain you've no real need to fly over I don't know if you need something that can fly as high as it possible can

With aerospace technology it'd be more efficient to send something straight up and come straight down again if altitude if what you're concerned with

[Wolf72]

no actual need for upper atmo, just what ever is described as 'normal' via the BTU.

[Dragon Cat]

no actual need for upper atmo, just what ever is described as 'normal' via the BTU.

Honestly I don't know enough about the atmosphere or BT flight heights to say how high they fly but if the canon ones are not adding environmental sealing then I'd assume that they

 a) don't fly hight enough for that to be a concern

 b) have them included in their construction.

May be an ask the writers question

[Wolf72]

pressurized vs environmental sealing may be two different things, even though the definitions may overlap.

I'm going with b) on the basis they are not included in the few official designs I've seen. And that sealing is probably meant for toxic atmospheres -- oi, that'd suck living on that type of planet, but I guess if you need to survive there, it's what you do.

[Dragon Cat]

Yeah environmental suggests to me it's like NBC environments and toxic/no atmo which you wouldn't want a conventional bird in anyway

[idea weenie]

Would you need something that can hit 10k altitude in BT? Most planets are not as densely populated as modern day Earth even, there can't be the massive amount of air traffic we have or the population centres or the regions you can't fly over due to conflict

Sure it's more efficient to fly in the Jetstream if all you're doing is flying one continent to the next or around a mountain you've no real need to fly over I don't know if you need something that can fly as high as it possible can

With aerospace technology it'd be more efficient to send something straight up and come straight down again if altitude if what you're concerned with

I was referring to 10k feet (just under 2 miles), the Jet Streams are over 6 miles up (~10k meters).