RESTARTING THE CONVERSATION

Variants of the APT would seem entirely plausible, so much so that they must exist. However, they're really not much more than targets.

AC: Armed cutter, already published
APA: SFG version isn't going to happen.
APB: dunno
APC: commando version, plausible, have we done it?
APD: drone version, seems subsumed into AC.
APE: escort, plausible, have we done it?
APF: fast carrier resupply, plausible, have we done it?
APG: guided weapon version, AC covers it.
APH: Silo type-H drone, might do this if silos are ever approved, which isn't likely.
API: Investivative ship for police, sort of a CSI team? Plausible.
APJ: Penal variant, plausible, have we done it?
APK: killer combat variant, unlikely, AC is it.
APL: Leader variant, why?
APM: minefield maintenance proposal by Petrick, plausible but little more than a target.
APN: diplomatic version, plausible but little more than a target.
APO: No idea what this would be.
APP: PFT version with two PFs, not sure what it would be used for, would NOT be used in teams of three for a regular flotilla.
APQ: survey ship, too small to go very far but perhaps usable in "next star system" missions, plausible, but only a target.
APR: repair ship? Seems unlikely to have enough systems to matter, but maybe a patch and pray concept?
APS: Scout, too small for much use, perhaps colony defense support unit?
APT: Traffic Control, plausible but only a target.
APU: Theater transport to move pods around? Plausible but only a target.
APV: carrier with four fighters? Plausible but of any real use?
APW: Wartime version, not sure where to go.
APX: X-tech? Really?
APY: Early Years variant? Have we really never done this?
APZ: Not sure what Z stands for, weapons test platform?

APT Tank/vehicle landing ship: Probably exists but the game has the Free Tanker which does the job better, nobody would pay for us and it would cost us time (which is money) to do one.

APT fuel tanker: Probably exists for local use but it's just a target, nobody would pay for it, and there is no functional difference between it and a regular APT.

Unarmed priority transport: The stock APT barely has weapons as it is. Would enough space be freed to create another cargo box? Would anyone care?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 05:26 pm: Edit

APB, an armed priority business transport? Uber wealthy CEO types might want or need to have this available for those times they need to travel beyond Federation territory to negotiate with foreign potentates?

Little need for cargo space but might require a hanger to carry a yacht? Lavish quarters for VIPs, lounge for entertaining bigwigs?

Might require a steward and staff... bartender, wait staff for serving meals?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 05:34 pm: Edit

I wouldn't limit it to business. A luxury yacht sort of thing. But it's really just a target. Would anyone pay for an SSD that just changed half of the cargo into hull?

By Patrick H. Dillman (Patrick) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 05:45 pm: Edit

My Prime Directive group ended a campaign that had a Mobile NCIS using a modified Prime Trader. I could see most empires other than the UFP using an APT for such a role.

By Will McCammon (Djdood) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 06:13 pm: Edit

To me, a lot of them already exist as variants of the Prime Trader. That small and there isn't a whole lot of difference and a lot of them would fall into the "nobody would pay for us and it would cost us time (which is money) to do one" box.

Some thoughts for if they do move-forward -

APP: PFT version with two PFs...

Other than a local-patrol or National Guard thing (pretty useless in a real-fight), it could maybe find more traction as a civilian ship. Late-war and (especially) post-war, toting a pair of workboats where they need to go. Maybe even an "Uber" service for itinerant workboats, taking them to where the work is clustered, once a region dries up.

APR: repair ship? Seems unlikely to have enough systems to matter, but maybe a patch and pray concept?

Wouldn't expect a lot of these, but I could see the navies having a few (maybe one for every 5 repair freighters?) for "get there firstest" patch-and-pray repairs to get ships out of danger zones and back to where a repair freighter can reach it. They could also act as a mechanic's helper to a repair freighter when not racing off to the rescue.

APU: Theater transport to move pods around? Plausible but only a target.

The frigate-based transport hauling full-size pods without engine changes pushed it pretty far in my mind. A tiny little APT trying to do it would look like a tack stuck into the side of a pencil.

It would need structural changes to add the pod clamp and carry-through framing to take the loads, so maybe a third (or fourth) engine could be added as part of that major rework.

APX: X-tech? Really?

Honestly thought it already exists. Admittedly, X-ships aren't my thing and I don't keep that all in my head.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 06:37 pm: Edit

Published APT Variants:

APS: Armed Prospector, Module F1.

ART: Armed Recovery Transport, Basically a fighter pilot rescue ship, Captain's Log #38.

APT: The baseline ship, Advanced Missions.

APX: The Advanced Technology Variant, Module X1.

CUT: The Armed version.

EPT: Armed Executive Transport, Module R8.

The ship is not suitable as a tank or GCV transport mostly because it cannot land on planets which the Free Trader can do.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 07:06 pm: Edit

In another topic, I posted a suggestion for an Improved APT (I-APT) and Improved Cutter (I-CUT), and also a Stretched APT (S-APT).

In my opinion, the APT should have had a Ph-2, not Ph-3, from the first draft. A Free Trader outguns it, for crying out loud!! (SVC thinks the same thing, but too late to change it now.)

The I-APT and I-CUT both have a service date of Y170. The I-APT adds one Ph-2:360 at a cost of +5 EPV / +10 BPV (my estimation), and the I-CUT adds one Ph-3:360 at a cost of +3 BPV.

The S-APT has service date of Y175 and takes the I-APT to the next level. It adds two Cargo, one Impulse, a second Ph-3 (in addition to the I-APT's Ph-2) but the Ph-3s now become LS/RS instead of 360, and one Shield box (from five to six boxes) to each facing, all at a cost of +20 EPV and +15 BPV (on top of the I-APT cost). The Federation built a couple dozen of these to resupply drones to front-line warships with the Y175 upgrades that added more drones per rack.

I can e-mail the draft SSDs to SVC/SPP if you want them. I posted them on PhotoBucket, but with recent changes on that site, the images got munged up pretty bad.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, January 13, 2017 - 11:54 pm: Edit

APR seems like it should work... fast, small so if it gets destroyed you haven't lost as much as you would if you had to send a repair ship into danger.

Need one for each published fleet... possibly tied up to the FEM... in fact certain FEM missions might require the APR gets dispatched first to help pick up the pieces.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 12:01 am: Edit

So far as the Early Years go, the YAP (YR1.13) and YCUT (YR1.14) were published in SFB Module Y3.

Actually, if there were any APT (or CUT) hulls in the Aurora, Kraknora, or PX 123 systems at the time of their respective "disappearances" in Y130, Y171, or Y178, perhaps some of them might have been converted into a distinct set of variants by the Federal Republic of Aurora?

By Randy Blair (Randyblair) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 04:31 am: Edit

The APT is an EXPENSIVE ship, BPV-wise. About on par with a naval frigate.
How about an Armed Modular Transport that allows for the flexibility of mission specific configurations while not being prohibitively expensive?

Take out the six cargo and Ph3 and put in a MODULE.

The MODULE can be one of many different things.

D module - light drone bombardment version, 4xDrone-B, 1xSpecial Sensor, 2xCargo (Note the absence of Ph3)

E module - escort version, 2xADD/Plasma-D/PhG(360), 1xPh3 (or PhG), 2xShuttle, 2xCargo

F Module - fast carrier resupply version, 6xShuttle, 1xPh3

G module - commando version, 1ph3, 2xtrans, 2xbarracks, 1xcargo, 1xGAS shuttle

I module - Police Investigation version, 1xPh2, 1xbarracks, 1xtrans, 1xGAS shuttle, 1xspecial sensor, 1xCargo, 1xprobe

J module - Penal version, 1xPh2, 1xSecurity, 1xCenter warp, 1xHull, 3xCargo : Module can separate MC:1/12, TM:AA NOT NIMBLE

M module - minefield maintenance version, 1xPh1/2, 4xMine, 1xTrac, 1xPh1/2(360)

N module - diplomatic version, 1xPh2, 1xSecurity (No Mutiny), 1xShuttle, 1xfighter RR), 2xHull, 1xCargo

P module - PFT version, 1xPh3, 2xTrac(w/mech links), 2xRepair, 2xCargo (Purpose would be to be part of the supply train to pull out crippled PFs for emergency repairs to bring them back into the war front.)

Q module - survey version, 1xPh3, 2xProbe, 1xSpecial Sensor, 2xLab, 1xCargo

R module - repair version, 1xPh3, 6xRepair

S module - scout version, 1xPh3, 2xSpecial Sensor, 2xAPR, 2xCargo

U module - Theater transport version, 1xPh3, 2xTrac, 3xCenter Warp, 1xCargo (Three of these can tow one full sized pod. Module includes mechanical linkages in tractors [not shown or needed on SSD] to secure craft to pod.)

V module - Carrier version, 1xPh3, 4xFighter, 1xTrac, 1xCargo

W module - Wartime/weapons platform version, 1xPh1/2, 2xWeapon(Disr/Photon/Fusion/Hellbore*/Plasma-G*/Web Caster), 3xAPR/AWR, 1xCargo (Subject to Shock if both heavy weapons are fired, per shock rules)

Z module - Phaser boat version, 1xPh1, 2xPh1/2(RS/LS), 2xPh3/G(RS/LS), 2xCargo

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 10:26 am: Edit

SVC: how firm is the APH tied to being an H silo variant?

(SVC SEZ: Not all all, that was just the only H proposal on file. Note that we do not have to fill the alphabet.)

I could see a need for a APH hospital ship/medical transport for provinces without advanced medical facilities. I.e. No star base, major or minor planets. Seriously ill victims would be hours or even days from the life saving facilities.

When there are no medical missions, the ship could carry out public health missions. There are a thousand useful places in each F&E hex, most without adequate medical facilities. A APH could transport public health nurses to administer vaccinations to children.

Might even include dental services such as an oral surgeon.

Might branch out and include civil engineer to certify public works projects meet Federation standards.

Would be a support ship for the local police squadron and reports to the police commissioner.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 11:42 am: Edit

concerning the V version. Recommend dropping the extra tractor and I assume extra phaser 3 in randy blairs variant, to make room two more fighters. Carried f-8 or f-20 fighters only.

CVE ought to have six fighters minimum. Intended for convoy escort.

By Dal Downing (Rambler) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 02:49 pm: Edit

4 Fighter is enough for a ship this size. Such a carrier an escort were probably built for convoy escort to supplement naval vessels already present.

By Dal Downing (Rambler) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 02:54 pm: Edit

The question would I buy this. A book of civilian varaiants? Eventually yes, but I would not rush an order just to get it.

I would be more likely to buy something like this strictly as an emodule or epacks. Hopefully in color to supplement a GPD or PD20 game. Sorta this is your ship aid.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 03:03 pm: Edit

Actually... the F&E community might support this four fighter carrier variant, withou an escort. Think about a fleet security screening squadron. Excellent pinning units.

Assume a F&E command rating flagship with 9 command rating, nine APVs each with four fighters. Toss in an APS scout in the free scout position and you get eleven pinning ships and 36 fighter, which count as 18 fighter factors.

That's a 14 pin count pinning force.

As every ship except the flag is nimble, they would have a good chance to escape. In F&E, half of the actual ships, including the flagship escape automatically.

The remaining ships are limited to the command rating, which might be pretty low. An APV with a F&E cmd rating of two (just a guess, I have no idea what the real value will be.) would mean a single APV plus however many fighters it could lead into battle.

As a pinning force, it should be able to escape with minimal loss.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 03:11 pm: Edit

Dal was posting when I composed.

I wonder if this might be packaged as a GURPs PD supplement? Include a couple versions deck plans, some rpg play aids, and a Star Fleet Battles section or two and you appeal to two distinct segments of ADB fan base.

If you had some F&E optional rules it would help.

Convoys extend the supply grid...what if a three ship APT convoy could support three ships beyond the range of the normal supply grid?

Lots of things that could impact different sfu product lines.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 04:17 pm: Edit

AC: Armed cutter, already published

SPP COMMENT: If this is the CUT, then yes.

APA: SFG version isn't going to happen.

SPP COMMENT: While doubtless a surprise, it only really has the power to freeze one unit for two turns, or two units for one turn, and is too small to survive even making the attempt. Would certainly be an attractive target and a relatively easy kill of a very expensive experiment. Would also risk very much the technology being captured by the enemy as the ship would be too easy to overwhelm with boarders.

APB: dunno

PETRICK COMMENT: Armed Priority Battle boat?

APC: commando version, plausible, have we done it?

PETRICK COMMENT: Convert half the cargo to barracks, Three of the APRs to Shuttle (1xHTS, 2xGAS including the existing shuttle box) and two APRs to Transport (total of three). Age old problem of too small a ship with too weak shields and too profitable to the enemy to kill. If you can jack of the shields of this boat, why not also jack up the shields of other variants of the ship? It could in this configuration carry most of a battalion (10 BPs per barracks box) in fairly cramped conditions (only two hull otherwise), and would really depend on transporters of other ships to land the landing force quickly (or extract it quickly if things went south).

APD: drone version, seems subsumed into AC.

PETRICK COMMENT: I agree.

APE: escort, plausible, have we done it?

PETRICK COMMENT: No, and any such conversion would probably start with the Cut. Hydrans replace LS/RS phaser-2s with phaser-Gs and install Aegis and a ready rack in the shuttle bay. Lyrans, LDR . . . retain phaser-2s, install aegis and ready rack. Feds, Kzintis, WYNs install type-G drone racks in place of drone racks (LS/RS phasers), install aegis, install fighter ready rack. Klingons, install ADD racks, install aegis, install fighter ready rack. Tholians, retain LS/RS phaser-1s, install aegis, install fighter ready rack. Gorns, Romulans, ISC, install/retain plasma-D racks, install aegis, install fighter ready rack.

APF: fast carrier resupply, plausible, have we done it?

PETRICK COMMENT: Seems to be the ART in Captain's Log #38.

APG: guided weapon version, AC covers it.

PETRICK COMMENT: Pretty much.

APH: Silo type-H drone, might do this if silos are ever approved, which isn't likely.

PETRICK COMMENT: Agree.

API: Investivative ship for police, sort of a CSI team? Plausible.

PETRICK COMMENT: Would be no different than existing APT carrying a police investigative detail.

APJ: Penal variant, plausible, have we done it?

PETRICK COMMENT: Does not seem plausible to me, not as I understand the way penal ships are supposed to work.

APK: killer combat variant, unlikely, AC is it.

PETRICK COMMENT: I agree.

APL: Leader variant, why?

PETRICK COMMENT: Attempt at a convoy command ship rather than a skid?

APM: minefield maintenance proposal by Petrick, plausible but little more than a target.

PETRICK COMMENT: APT hull is so small than in any role it is little more than a target.

APN: diplomatic version, plausible but little more than a target.

PETRICK COMMENT: Seems to be the EPT in Module R8.

APO: No idea what this would be.

PETRICK COMMENT: Emergency Oiler? Sent out from a base to provide fuel to a crippled ship whose crippling has left it insufficient fuel to reach the base for repair?

APP: PFT version with two PFs, not sure what it would be used for, would NOT be used in teams of three for a regular flotilla.

PETRICK COMMENT: We have defined some ships as just too small to operate fast patrol ships (such as the Lyran Manx police corvette), and an APT seems a good example of this, i.e., it is just too small to operate PFs at all.

APQ: survey ship, too small to go very far but perhaps usable in "next star system" missions, plausible, but only a target.

PETRICK COMMENT: Seems like too much money invested for little return.

APR: repair ship? Seems unlikely to have enough systems to matter, but maybe a patch and pray concept?

PETRICK COMMENT: Stablemate of the Emergency Oiler?

APS: Scout, too small for much use, perhaps colony defense support unit?

PETRICK COMMENT: Standard APT has 12 points of power. Using even one special sensor to the maximum extent takes 8.5 points of power (one point for fire control, one point to power the channel, six points for lending, a half point to keep the crew breathing), nine points if you also want to power the shields, leaving three points for Speed 15 tops. Does not seem like an effective scout.

APT: Traffic Control, plausible but only a target.

PETRICK COMMENT: In any case, we cannot use this designator for Traffic Control as it is the base designator of the class (Armed Priority Transport: APT).

APU: Theater transport to move pods around? Plausible but only a target.

PETRICK COMMENT: I find this implausible in the extreme. An FFT generally has 12 warp and using a point of impulse can make Speed 17 hauling a pod (0.67 movement cost with one pod). An APT as only six warp, and even with a point of impulse (assuming the same 0.67 movement cost with one pod) would be limited to Speed 10.

APV: carrier with four fighters? Plausible but of any real use?

PETRICK COMMENT: There are other police carriers with only four fighters, but they mostly bring more inherent firepower than an APT hull does.

APW: Wartime version, not sure where to go.

PETRICK COMMENT: Pretty much the only place would be a stretched hull as Garth Getgen has proposed. Not sure I want to go there myself.

APX: X-tech? Really?

PETRICK COMMENT: As noted, was published in Module X1.

APY: Early Years variant? Have we really never done this?

PETRICK COMMENT: As Gary Carney has noted, it already exists.

APZ: Not sure what Z stands for, weapons test platform?

PETRICK COMMENT: Too small to test some weapons, such as PPD, plasma-S or larger, etc.

APT Tank/vehicle landing ship: Probably exists but the game has the Free Tanker which does the job better, nobody would pay for us and it would cost us time (which is money) to do one.

PETRICK COMMENT: As noted before, the inability of APT hulls to land on planets makes this a poor choice as a vehicle landing ship. Design would need a large shuttle bay with more than one HTS shuttle, and if it lost the HTS shuttles . . . Even if it was not destroyed itself it would effectively be mission killed.

APT fuel tanker: Probably exists for local use but it's just a target, nobody would pay for it, and there is no functional difference between it and a regular APT.

PETRICK COMMENT: Sure there is . . . larger explosion value. (Fleet Oilers make really big bangs, why they operate in separate convoys. See Module R11).

Unarmed priority transport: The stock APT barely has weapons as it is. Would enough space be freed to create another cargo box? Would anyone care?

PETRICK COMMENT: The Stock APT has one (1) phaser-3-360, i.e., exactly the same armament as the stock small freighter. Its only real advantage is that it is fast (Speed 31 to the small freighter's top speed of 13 if it uses its battery for life support for two turns and does not power its shields or fire control). An "unarmed" variant would not be that different from the "armed stock version."

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 14, 2017 - 06:10 pm: Edit

APL: attempt at a convoy command ship rather than a skid?

Interesting option. War time only? Perhaps part of a "kit" of skids used to arm convoys ships for the final "leg" in to combat zones?

Otherwise you might need four or more sets of skids and duck tails for convoys on missions into combat zones.

Assuming the speed of civilian convoys being limited to the speed of the slowest ship, you might have to fit them out with multiple kits given the chances of enemy interception.

Such a escort kit might well require a command ship of some type (APL) four self defense skids, two for a large freighter, one each for the small freighters, one large ducktail, two small.

Might require a rendezvous location with a ground base or SAMs with a barracks module.

More of a star fleet battles thing than a F&E thing.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, January 16, 2017 - 01:07 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile:

The Convoy Command Skid already exists in Module R11 (R1.68D).

It is not part of a "kit" of skids and ducktails, it is a command skid, the benefit of which is to increase the command rating of the escorts. Thus a Convoy that was being escorted by Police Cutters would normally have a maximum of four Cutters (the command rating of a Cutter is typically "3," meaning it can command three other ships, thus itself and three other ships). With the Convoy Command skid you might have as many as seven cutters (command rating of three is increased to six, allowing itself and six other cutters).

So, no, there are not going to be "convoy kits." (EDIT: At least I do not think so, there is always a chance someone will make a convincing case, perhaps even through the Federation & Empire rules, i.e., some rule that allows for some expenditure of economic points to have "tougher" convoys, but for now any such rule could simply be seen as implementing the existing Convoy Command Skid, the convoy is tougher because more police escorts, not normally seen in Federation & Empire, the ones not called into fleet service, are escorting the convoys.)

Garth L. Getgen:

Stretching hulls has been around for a long time and has been done many times. I am not sure that such a thing really adds anything in the case of the APT, and do not see a need to redo the existing 5 APT variants to reflect stretched versions, as if a stretched APT existed, there would be a stretched CUT at the bear minimum, and obviously it would displace the APX.

As to an "improved" version replacing the phaser-3 with a phaser-2 . . . seriously in my opinion, why bother. The actual increase in damage output is not that great and the added range does not do much to my mind.

However, if SVC judges that either such is worth doing, the SSDs themselves would be easy enough to create.

By Charles Chapel (Ctchapel) on Monday, January 16, 2017 - 03:40 pm: Edit

Would that be a bare bear Russian CUT variant?

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, January 16, 2017 - 04:30 pm: Edit

SPP: the Improved APT design adds a PH-2/360 (not replace the existing Ph-3), so it'll have two phasers. And even at that, the FT outguns it.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, January 16, 2017 - 10:48 pm: Edit

APN: "plausible, but little more than a target."

Should be allowed as the Federation and non Klingons have no diplomatic cruisers, and from comments made in other topics are unlikely to ever get a diplomatic cruiser.

At present the only vessel known to carry diplomats in Federation service is the star liner pod. Very unlikely to risk both a star liner pod and a Tug as a substitute.

Might use the EPT in module R8.

I will pull the SSDs of the EPT and Klingon D7N... I forget exactly what systems are needed to support diplomats...