Well, we could tell the story of the Orion captured APT coded APH (uses an 'h' word not appropriate for a family friendly site like this bbs).

Basically a APT filled with Orion Slave girls (cortesans or entertainers) intended to assist Orion Pirate ships with "Morale Issues" tm

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 03:35 pm: Edit

Yeah, but the merchants have since disallowed private freighters to carry large space mines for some reason. I think the idea might work....once. It was mostly intended as a joke.

After a first use if word gets around there are some APTs so outfitted all pirates will avoid following APTs directly behind.

I also have doubts that you could disguise mine racks. If I was a pirate and spotted an APT with mine racks I would assume the worst and destroy it or try to board and capture it. NSMs are probably worth a bit on the black market.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 03:50 pm: Edit

a mine layer version APT has been discussed at length. 6 racks, 4 spaces per rack, only gives you 24 small mines. I think it's been established that you need 25 racks to lay one package of mines.

It's been talked to death in at least two different topics.

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 03:55 pm: Edit

A pure mine layer makes no sense. My suggestion was mostly a joke. I envision some brazenly arrogant officer in the naval police presenting this design to a group of his superiors as an "answer to the Orion problem" expecting this proposal to make his career and getting crushed as he is laughed out of the room.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 04:06 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile:

That variant of the APT already exists I am sure. I am pretty sure each cartel controls one or more EPTs (R1.66) in that configuration (and I am only half joking).

Jon Murdock:

Actually, a larger change than that. Prior to the "Doomsday Edition" of the early 1990s, any ship could purchase NSMs (two maximum) and they only cost three Commander's Option Points. (It was a standard purchase for any ship I commanded, along with the 12 T-bombs at one Commander's Option Point each). Complaints by the Kzinti Hegemony Drone Conservation Board and Romulan Anti-Photo Bombing Alliance cut back the number of T-bombs and increased their costs, and the notorious habit of at least one player of covering the map in those "free dummy T-bombs" resulted in those being cut back to one per real T-bomb purchased. I was given to understand that complaints by the Orion Cartels and the Romulans were why NSM use was so grossly curtailed.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 04:09 pm: Edit

Jon Murdock:

Pure minelayers that Jeff Wile was referring to were not the concept of sneaking one into a convoy to try to surprise attackers, but ships needed for the task of laying minefields. Minefields become a big deal starting in the Y150s, but minelaying freighters show up in the late Y160s. So there has been some proposal that perhaps the earliest ships involved in creating the minefields around bases were variants of the Free Trader and perhaps the APT, and these were subsequently superseded by the more effective minelaying freighters.

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 04:12 pm: Edit

Those Romulan hypocrites, claiming they need NSMs curtailed to protect their precious cloaked ships when all they really want is to keep their NSM monopoly!

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 04:15 pm: Edit

SPP: I know, that concept makes some sense though a variant of the Free Trader is probably a better option. My suggested proposal was intentionally pretty ridiculous and distinct from that idea.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 04:19 pm: Edit

A "mine package" (M6.1)/(M6.2) is about 87 spaces of mines, which would require a minimum of 22 mine racks to carry. In theory a Free Trader could be converted to carry 12 mine racks (meaning you would need two to lay one mine package) and an APT to carry five mine racks (meaning you would need five to carry one mine package). One Small Mine Laying Freighter has 25 mine racks, and so can carry one mine package by itself, while a Large Mine Laying freighter can carry two mine packages by itself.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 05:15 pm: Edit

Perhaps before the mine laying freighters arrived standard freighters were used to lay mines.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 05:27 pm: Edit

Wayne Douglas Power:

Doubtful. The background of laying a field makes it pretty clear that there is more to laying a mine field than just having the mines and a ship. The ship has to have facilities for programming special operations of the mines. Linking captor mines to a base and/or sensor mines, programming the sensor mines for what types of targets to accept and ignore, linking mines to other mines (chain, deadman switches), and etc. That is why a typical small freighter has a crew of "1," but a small minelaying freighter has a crew of "5," the others are the specialists to program and lay the mines.

Now, yes, you can have your minelaying freighter, and another freighter carrying additional mines as cargo that it will transfer to the minelaying freighter as it empties its mine racks, but to lay a minefield, you need a dedicated minelayer (which can be a minesweeper), not just any old ship and a few mines.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 05:50 pm: Edit

Add one of the skids for facilities, special programing and extra crew. (this is for the Y150 to Y160 before minelayer freighters)

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 06:27 pm: Edit

Wayne Douglas Power:

To the best of my knowledge there is no "minelaying skid" and I do not think it would be a good idea to add one.

In any case, such an arrangement would not convert the freighter into a "minelaying freighter" as efficient as the designed one.

A minelaying freighter is designed to use its mine racks, and can thus lay 25 mines (26 if one is laid by transporter) per turn. A small freighter does not have inherent mine racks, and would lay mines at a maximum rate of two (2) per turn (one out the shuttle hatch, and one by transporter). Adding a skid or ducktail (or both) to a standard small freighter is not really going to change that, i.e., you cannot actually directly convert the cargo boxes of an existing freighter to mine racks, the ship is purpose built for the job.

As other examples (at the risk of pseudo-Vulcan logic) note that adding the fighter skid to a freighter does not bequeath it any of the abilities of a carrier, and adding a self-defense skid type-1 does not increase the freighter's nominal seeking weapon control rating (it remains three). So adding a purported "minelaying skid" or "minelaying ducktail" or both would not make the freighter a "minelayer" for purposes of creating a minefield. To be a minelayer it must be converted into the role.

Picture what the inside of a minelaying freighter must look like in order for all 25 mine racks to have access to a part of the exterior of the freighter to lay a mine in the same impulse (legal, but wasteful), and have enough internal volume that the crew can get around to perform maintenance and repairs and reload and unload the mine racks. So it is not a simple case of simply replacing a box on an SSD with a different box, but there is actual assumed engineering and design to make that ship function as it does.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 07:55 pm: Edit

Yes I understand, I am making a suggestion for what may of been used before the Mine laying freighters were built (a freighter,salvage skid, and some early modification to the standard freighter, that later leads to the mine laying freighters of Y160)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, January 05, 2018 - 11:55 pm: Edit

Wayne Douglas power: Have you checked the year service dates for when skids and duck tails became available?

For some reason, I am thinking it was during the General War years... and not prior to year 160.in which case, the purpose built mine layers preceded any possible skid/ducktail combination.

Plus, if I recall correctly, didn't SPP just post in this topic a few days ago that the mine layer/sweeper/mine maintainence ship variants might have been the first auxiliaries built for mine field service?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 12:18 am: Edit

SVC&SPP:
One further point concerning an APH variant.

Public Health issues still exist in the SFBs universe. Without a APH (regularly assigned to the Province Police squadron, responsible for 4 to 7f&e sectors) the public health responsibilities would necessarily fall on the Police patrol ships of the province.

In fact, any public safety issues such as normal vaccinations, health and safety inspections, hygiene, food safety, industrial safety inspections.

Do you really want your security forces to divert to ever minor colony, mining station, agricultural world, prison world, scientific out post in the province at least once a year to conduct routine health, safety and hygiene inspections?

Recommend that such responsibilities would be controlled by the police province commander, and that personnel specialized with such skills have access to such vessels necessary to complete such tasks. (Skiffs, modular courier, or other auxiliary as needed.)

If a APT variant is justified, the staffing of the crew and the public health personnel can be determined later.

SPP has pointed out that the normal crew of an APT would not be sufficient.

Note: might also be responsible for monitoring public works as well, in which case a professional Engineer to supervise construction and building requirements on various worlds are complied with.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 12:24 am: Edit

Jeff, Y140 for skids.

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 01:10 am: Edit

Jeff:

Why would the police be responsible for public health and all those other functions? Those would be the responsibility of the local and provincial governments. If the planet is too small to have some type of specialist then one can be sent for periodically on the local free trader. I do not think you would get permission to found a colony without at least a doctor or two and if you need vaccinations then you put in an order and wait for the next supply shipment to bring it.

If higher levels of government need to send someone to a planet like a health inspector they Book them passage on a ship going there anyways. Sometimes that might be a police cutter or flagship or a National Guard ship in the area or even a regular fleet vessel if one is in the area and it is convenient or if the need is an emergency but I cannot imagine the police being in charge of these functions. Cops do not run clinics, monitor bridge building, or conduct food inspections.

By Michael Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 01:30 am: Edit

APH. A portable waystation for PFs.

So you need to move a squadron of PFs further than they can self ferry? This thing accompanies them and STOPS so they can get their ionic charges drained, everyone gets a shower... Also has some fuel, water, repair capacity, etc.

CANNOT tote PFs, but it can dock them if speed 0. Any docked PFs are destroyed if the ship moves.

As the SVC story relates it, PFs have more than a full day endurance, but they do tend to get manky on extended operations.

ALSO, this ship might allow a PF squadron a bit more strike range by "tanking" them before they attack.

By Jon Murdock (Xenocide) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 01:42 am: Edit

I do not think an APT is big enough to fit docking stations for six PFs.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 01:46 am: Edit

I think fuel ships (way stations) have been ruled out.

By Michael Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 03:55 am: Edit

The PF docking stations fold out from the sides like wings. Whatever.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 09:31 am: Edit

Jon Murdock: the Province is a middle level of Government between the Empire (let's say the Federation for this conversation) and planetary government (if there is one...)take for example a single science outpost deployed for a specific science mission. That mission might last years, but there would be zero planetary government in place.

Or take a greedy mining company. Said owners having secured the services of "technology workers" through the "Orion employment Services" proprietor, Steven Petrick Services, Inc. Orion planetary limited. Said slaves... errr, I mean indentured workers, yeah, that will work! Anyway, these poor benighted servants provide needed labor that provide badly needed ores for the factories in the empire. That said, someone has to make sure these beings are fed, clothed, receive medical services and that they work in safe working conditions.

Let's say the evil capitalist, Jersch, pays his taxes, has tame representatives in the Federation Council and Senate, and is a drinking buddy of the Police Commissioner in the province.

With all of the financial demands on Jersch's money coffers, he has to keep his workers productive.

But, being that the mining operations are located in an unpopulated planetary system, the only governmental authority would have to be the provincial government.

Jersch, being an intelligent capitalist, knows that the Federation Charter requires that the Federation provide technical assistance to member planets (and their associated colonies) has dutifully petitioned his ward boss on Orion to request "development assistance" from the Federation provincial authorities. Jersch's buddies in the Federation Are overjoyed to help in any way they can... leaving provincial governor Jon Murdock no choice but to order Federation Police Captain Michael Grafton of the POL U.S.S. Calamity Jane to render assistance.

Since Petrick's company was very effective in providing workers, the mine has well over a thousand technical servants in place. Jersch very thoughtfully provides food, (Generaly a grain based entrey known as "gruel".)

Grafton is horrified to learn that he (and his ship) are expected to provide any needed services and facilities that greedy Jersch forgot, or was too cheap to provide....

Lucky for Jersch, Graftons civilian superiors want Jersch to be taken very good care of because the aforementioned superiors really really really want Jersch's political contributions to continue being paid...

So.. here we have a case in which initial appearances are very deceiving. Graft on can't refuse the services, can't arrest anyone, and has a life time of tasks to complete supporting Jersch's mining operation.

pOL captains are a very intelligent and resourceful group, as a rule... and Grafton might well find a way to upset Jersch's AppleCart, but it won't be easy, or fast.

Multiply it by the hundreds or thousands of other places demanding special assistance, and the few overworked POL ships assigned would be overwhelmed by beings like Jersch.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 09:45 am: Edit

Wayne:

You need to read Petrick's post above in more detail. He stated that mine fields became a "big deal" in the yr 150's. He also stated minelaying freighters didn't appear until the yr 160's.

That means other ships ( I think he meant free trader variant mine layers, but you would need to get SPP to confirm that.) had to be the ships laying any needed minefields.

He also stated that there are no mine laying skids, and for the reasons stated, are unlikely to be added to the game. As always, you could go over Petrick's head and appeal directly to SVC...

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Saturday, January 06, 2018 - 11:04 am: Edit

Actually, I could see the skid/duck tail adapter being a first attempt at a mine laying freighter, not all ideas work.

As to publishing some of these ideas, how many targets do we need? A lot of these ideas makes sense at the Prime Directive level of detail, that otherwise are a bunch of small ships to shoot, or protect, in the other games.