Jim,

Back in the first post I did specify the refit would be for vanilla Free Traders in a Naval Auxiliary role.

At the beginning of the General War (year 168), the vanilla Free Traders could complete the mission, but as the war progressed, new (more effective) fighters were deployed, eventually, heavy fighters, interceptors and sometime after year 178, the exact year varies with empires depending on the PF phase in schedule, PF flotillas were deployed.

Once PF’s get deployed, the naval auxiliaries would need a little help to survive long enough to disengage successfully.

Remember the PF rules pertaining to dash pods. Even a little damage (once the PFs shield goes down) will cause disproportionate damage to a PFs warp power.

It is where I believe a free trader specific refit is warranted.

Steve Petrick:

I am not proposing a general refit for all free traders everywhere.

Only for naval auxiliaries, and those for only for ships regularly assigned to areas where combat is expected, such as frontlines, disputed sectors or other areas where armed escorted convoys are not available.

The Federation Free Trader discussion, so far, has posited a modified plus refit. It has been disputed by Alan Trevor as being too powerful. The initial suggestion was for a pair of additional phaser 3s, a Drone G rack, and a APR.

The Kzinti Free Trader has had a suggestion of a modified C refit, but no exact details have been made.

I suggested that the Klingons and the Lyrans might have a different refit for their FT naval auxiliaries, but again, no specific definition of what that might be has been posted.

By James Cain (Jcain) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 12:38 pm: Edit

We already have carrier, troop ship, ground vehicle, and mine warfare versions of the free trader for military purposes. We also have salvage, prospecting, and VIP/passenger versions for other governmental uses. Therefore, it sounds like we are looking for armed versions (possibly including scout versions) or CL#53's "Customized Civilian Ships" versions.

I would suggest that any additional militarized / armed / scout version of the free trader base hull actually be based on the prime corvette, the prime traitor, or the free Q-ship instead of the base free trader hull.

Refits to all of the published "free" variants to allow "prime" engines after particular dates would make sense. (I cannot imagine, for example, a VIP version not having "prime" engines available after say Y175, or even perhaps much earlier. Certainly by Y190!) A "prime" engine refit also gives new life to free Q-ships operated by the Orion Cartels.

A Y175 phaser-3 to phaser-2 refits for ships that don't have anything better than a phaser-3 (ie. free tanker) might make sense.

I could definitely see Y175 drone rack upgrades for any drone-armed ships.

I would like to see the SSD for the cargo variant of the prime trader and a variant of the free trader that gets the battery & lab for cargo exchange of the prime trader. Alternatively, I would really like to see versions of the free trader, prime trader, and free trader-X that had NWO in place of some or all of their cargo boxes. CL#53's "Customized Civilian Ships" all but says that these existed.

By James Cain (Jcain) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Intelligence agencies might also love a free Q-ship with "prime" engines. History might have failed to record if an intelligence agency came up with the refit first or if a Cartel did, but clearly all the various intelligence agencies and Cartels would have considered the idea soon after.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 01:45 pm: Edit

There is also the tramp steamer civilian ship based on the small freighter.

Is a tramp trader possible?

By James Cain (Jcain) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 01:49 pm: Edit

Jeff:

A free tramp would likely be a civilian free trooper. (See "Free Trooper and Free Tanker" on page 156 of Prime Directive D20 Modern.)

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 03:20 pm: Edit

Service Tender:

Remove OPT, move 2xPh-3 in front of Bridge, add two Shuttle (3 total), change one set 6xCargo to 6x REPAIR, reduce Warp to 2x4 box (same movement cost), remove 2 box of Shield from all six facing.


This ship is used to top off air/water tanks, resupply food, swap out shuttles, and other general maintenance of ships, typically civilian ships making port-of-call stops.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Sunday, March 14, 2021 - 04:20 pm: Edit

Respectfully, Sgt G, the work you're talking about is done in ports here on Earth by self-propelled barges; a craft type that, for SFB purposes, would probably be best represented by some sort of modified Civilian Cargo Pod.

Lemme think...

Figure perhaps ten to twelve cargo boxes. Set them in separate groups; one represents consumables, the other, fuel. We'll need one bridge box, two Impulse boxes, and some hull. A battery will also be good. Perhaps two repair boxes might also be in order, but IMO, if a ship needed that sort of work, a Salvage Tug would likely be sent to work on it, or it would be taken to a dry dock instead of having a service tender carry around so much seldom used equipment (and excess mass).

If this ship needed to be relocated, it would probably be fitted into a small freighter.

Please don't get me wrong about this; I like the idea. It's just that I don't see a full fledged starship being used for such a mundane purpose.

By Steven Zamboni (Szamboni) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 12:02 pm: Edit

Orbital gunship for ground support / interdiction? Phaser-2's in the cargo bay to port, perhaps a couple extra transporters for artillery? The leftover cargo will be useful for keeping it on station for extended periods.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 12:15 pm: Edit

Jeff, there are the freighter-based Small and Large Fleet Oiler. My suggestion above it meant to be an even-smaller version of the same type of support craft.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 01:04 pm: Edit

James Cain:

There is a published Tramp Steamer SSD in the game, been published for years.

It is not interchangeable for either a Free Tanker or a Free Trooper.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 03:48 pm: Edit

Sgt G, I always saw the Auxiliary Oilers as SFU equivalents to USN UNREP ships. Maybe I'm misinterpreting the mission of what you proposed (VERY likely? ), but I was under the impression you were thinking of the eqivalent of civilian replenishment barges.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 03:54 pm: Edit

The bulk cargo haulers have a crew of one (small freighter), two (large freighters. including the jumbo and heavy).

One Crew unit to move a cargo of 25 boxes, which can be 1,250 space points of cargo. (2,500 on a large freighters, or 3,750 on a jumbo or 5,000 on a heavy).

A Free Trader moves just 600 spaces of cargo, but has a crew of two (same number as the Large freighter, or jumbo or heavy), and because it could land on planets to dicker with the locals, if has a third crew unit that is a security detachment, or a crew of from 26 to 34 personnel. But is moving less than half the cargo of the small freighter (I,250).

If you add a refit adding weapons, you are also adding crew. Because the weapons have to be manned, and the security detachment already has a job. Two phaser-3s and a drone rack is at the very least another crew unit. but probably more since the Orion Free Traitor went to eight crew units of which two were boarding parties (total of four boarding parties), meaning four crew of crew for that extra option mount.

This is not an efficient trader.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 03:58 pm: Edit

Yeah, pretty much what I had in mind. If a planet doesn't have a base, or the base is too busy / out of docking ports, this Supply Tender can service ships in orbit. It usually stays in-system, so it doesn't need full six-box engines. Unlike the Fleet Oilers, it can land on the planet to pick up more food / water / air.


Garth L. Getgen

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 04:08 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile:

If you are establishing a high end colony like that, you are going to have the support of the fleet to do it, because no purely civilian enterprise can have what you are describing. It is a government colony. It would thus be supported by a tug.

Ground bases would be carried to the site and lowered to the surface. With the ground bases would come the equipment to make roads. Probably a Starlinter pod would remain in orbit and beam down crews to work on the ground facilities. Then colonist would be delivered by cruise liners.

But a large colony effort as you describe does not justify Free Traders being diverted to the project. Most colonies start off small and have tractors and materials delivered to them and by the sweat of their own brows (and the sacrifice of women to produce more workers) rise up.

But very few of the hundreds, perhaps thousands of colonies on the Federation & Empire map are built as you appear to imagine.

They start with a small cadre and if successful, draw more immigrants and grow. Basically like the "Shake and Bake" colonies that were described in Aliens II.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Monday, March 15, 2021 - 04:35 pm: Edit

Note that the Armed Freighters also increased crew over and above the added boarding parties. A small freighter takes one crew unit, but the Armed variant added five (5) units of pure crew (and two crew units of boarding parties) while the large armed freighter added three crew units of boarding parties and Seven crew units of crew above its two crew units.

Adding weapons to the Free Trader will add crew. And the Free Trader does not have the space for this without trading cargo volume, which, as noted, is already less than half what a small freighter delivers. The Free Trader is designed to visit planets off the beaten path (that cannot afford a Commercial Platform) by landing directly. Freighters who want to compete with the Free Traders equip themselves with the Lighter Aboard Ship Skid, or a ducktail (or both), so they can send down a heavy transport shuttle (or shuttles) to make the deal for trade goods. (The deal makers may use the transporter or sub-space radio to arrange what will be delivered and what will be picked up.)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 07:39 am: Edit

Steve Petrick:

I am not sure if your response re: “high end colonies” was really meant for my comments.

Is it possible you were meaning to address Garth Getgen and Jeff Anderson (JGA)?

Just to repeat: the refit proposed was intended to be limited to Naval Auxiliaries crewed by Star Fleet personnel, in war zones where combat is expected. It is further limited by late General War period (year 180+) when PF’s have been deployed by both the Romulan and Klingon empires.

To add something, the Free Trader Aux refit might be present in a convoy, but was intended for missions where a military (read as high priority) cargo is needed at an existing (and specifically for) colonies recently liberated from coalition occupation/oppression.

The danger is interception by patrolling PF’s. The point defenses represented by the addition of a Drone rack mounted on a sponson (which anticipated the need to not reduce the free traders cargo capacity.)

Note: civilians, engaged in normal business would not willingly enter a danger zone. The risks would be unacceptable. The Naval Auxiliary refitted Free Trader is required to deliver spare parts and other materials that a recently liberated colony requires. (Crated fighters, drones, replacement shuttles, fighter pods, Chaff etc.)

To address the added crew unit requirement, I wonder if it is possible to add the provision that the drones are intended to assist the Free Trader in disengagement, and as such there is no reload drone stockpile. Reloading expended drones only occurs between scenarios, and only at bases(such as Star Bases, BTS etc.)

I will be honest, I had not considered the fact that adding additional phaser 3’s would require additional crew.

Question: would upgrading the existing pair of phaser 3’s into phaser 2 (or phaser 1) require additional crew unit as well? (See Steve Cains idea posted above).

The only remaining part of the proposal for a Federation Free Trader / naval Auxiliary refit is the proposed addition of a APR... but as someone has already pointed out, the full plus refit (2 phaser 3 point defense phasers, a Drone G rack and APR) is a material increase over the original pair of phaser 3s.

Given that there is an opt box available, might it be possible that it could be used to add either a additional phaser (1 or 2) OR (capitalization for emphasis, not shouting) a APR?

If adding a phaser 1 or 2 does indeed require additional crew, then so be it.

I repeat: this is not a civilian owned or operated Free Trader. It is a Star Fleet Naval Auxiliary. The added crew and equipment paid for by the Government, not the revenue generated by trade. It is paid for by the taxpayers. It’s mission is to restore contact to colonies lost to the Federation by blockade by Coalition forces in the areas recently liberated by Federation forces, and which are within range of Coalition bases that have PF flotillas present.

The use of the proposed refit is intended to assist the Refitted Free Trader in escaping said Patrolling PF’s. (Note: specifically, the intent is to increase the amount of damage a Refitted Free Trader can inflict on a PF by cresting a PFs shield and damaging its warp power (both normal engines as well as dash pods/ warp packs).

Not intended for convoy defense, or mainline combat.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 10:58 am: Edit

Stewart Frazier posted in this topic, back on March 12, 2021, that nothing could be added to the Free Trader or it would increase its movement cost. (Something of a paraphrase, but I hope it conveys both the spirit and material intent of Stewart’s comments.)

It has been brought to my intention that a Free Trader conversion, namely rule R1.65, a Civilian Luxury fast transport (FTT) has 42 SDD boxesThe SSD was published in Module R8.

1xOPT
2xCargo
2xBTTY
2xBridge
12xcenter Hull
3xShuttle
2xPhaser 3
3xTransporter
1xTractor
6xLeft WArp
6xRight Warp
2xImpulse

The Vanilla Free Trader has 37 SSD boxes:
1xOPT
1xTractor
1xTransporter
1xBridge
4xCenter Hull
2xPhaser 3
12xCargo
1xShuttle
6xLeft Warp
6xRight Warp
2xImpulse

***In theory*** I submit that hypothetically, the Free Trader design can accept up to 5 additional SSD boxes without incurring a Movement Cost adjustment.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 03:18 pm: Edit

Jeff, IIRC civilian cargo boxes are circa twice the size of most systems (50 cargo spaces, while cargo in an option box is IIRC only 25 cargo spaces).

The FTT has 42 boxes, but only 2 are cargo. The Free Trader has 37, but 12 are cargo. Presumable this means that the FTT used some of the added space for luxury amenities not represented by an SSD box.

If the Free Trader cargo is 25 space boxes then disregard this message. Away from books.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 03:31 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile:

I see. so your opinion is that you can look at every SSD, find the with the SSD with the most boxes that has the movement cost, and then add the resulting obviously missing boxes to the SSD and no change to movement cost. This of course works on the fallacy that all SSD boxes are the same. There is n difference between say a Cargo Box and a phaser-3 for example.

Boxes are not created equal. In remember that a Cargo box holds 50 spaces of cargo, except for a cargo box on an Orion designed ship which holds only 25, which happens to be the same that a PF cargo box holds. and PFs. Shall we redesign all existing PFs to have 26 internal boxes? After all, the APT has 26 boxes and is movement cost 1/5th like PFs, so PFs can obviously by our logic all have at least 26 boxes. Oh, weight, APT are size class 4 unts while PFs are size class 5.

How about we redesign the D7s and D6s to all have the same number of internals the C7s have? Or should we reduce the C7s to the same number of internals a D7 has by your logic. Oh, wait, then there are all those Federation movement cost 1 ships. What about the Kzinti CVs?

I am sorry, but there is more to the ships than just the SSD boxes. The Cargo bay is different and has non-SSD items that are not shown. Like the machines to handle the cargo and the access ports to move the cargo down to the planet's surface, which, surprise, are much reduced on the Civilian Luxury Fast Transport.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 03:39 pm: Edit

As to your mission profile. You do realize that succoring a newly liberated colony is something any starship or police ship can do. If the Colony is a major one, a lone Free Trader does not have the volume to get enough material there to do other than show a promise. You are going to send a whole escorted Convoy to do the job for a major world, and even that is going to be little enough. You are not going to build what amount to blockade runners to succor a liberated planet. Note that you are going to have organized this convoy when you were planning on pushing the enemy fleet back and landing your ground troops to remove the enemy infestation. It is going to include Small Manufacturing Freighters to produce the parts and a Freighter with raw materials to supply the Manufacturing freighter.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 04:59 pm: Edit

I see this argument as specious. A single PF is going to zork your upgraded Free trader if it can engage; so these extra guns really don't contribute to your survivability. So you attempt to disengage immediately. There is nothing higher end than a pair of fighters or a skiff, that you are going to beat in combat

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 05:38 pm: Edit

I would also point out that adding an APR pushes the disengagement Speed to 24, which is not really a factor as you can still disengage in one turn if you begin the turn moving at Speed 12.

As Mike Grafton's observation, again, the goal of a Free Trader by itself is to run. If it is going Speed 12 it disengages in one turn. If it is going Speed Zero (in orbit perhaps) it take it three turns o disengage.(0-10, 10-20, then 20-23). i it s going Speed 2-11, it will disengage in two turns. That all means that disengagement by Acceleration is possible in the scenario (scenario restrictions my disallow it). If i is attacked by one (1) PF, there is a question of how close the PF gets before it fires. There is no added power for the shields, and if all available power is being used to try to disengage, If a Standard Klingon G1 reaches Range 0, it will score a minimum of 20 points of damage (well, 22 if you count the Feedback) not counting his drones. That is eight points of internal damage. your lone PF has to Reach Range 0 for that. In turn, a Free Trader can score (with the Phaser-2 option mount) between 14 and 11 points of damage. So at that point it comes down to the G1's drones. If they are going to hit, the Free Trader will take at least 12 move internals (Might take 20 total if the drone goes through the Down Shield, or 32 total if the drone was a type-IV,or 44 total if both drones were type-IV and hit an intact shield.

Adding the refit lets you fire a the drones (two phaser-3s each) and launch a drone at the PF (to tie us hi phasers hopefully) and take the disruptor on an intact shield. But if his ADD shoots down your drone, you still take eight internals if he fires at point blank.

So, if your refitted Trader runs into TWO PF and cannot disengage by acceleration, you may as well surrender.

And just why are PFs patrolling alone? And why is your Free Trader nor traveling as part of a convoy for protection from such an eventuality? Free Traders are designed to RUN, not fight, and adding weapons and power at these levels does not change their mission profile.

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar3) on Wednesday, March 17, 2021 - 08:06 pm: Edit

Jeff, my point was if adding to the FT without taking some space from the cargo bay (and if those added spaces needed life support and maintenance areas), it would likely start increasing the movement cost.

Now, how many boxes could be added before that happens, depends on how thin the edge the ship is shirting to start with ... (BCH vs CCH??)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, March 18, 2021 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Okay.

I will concede that a plus refit for the Free Trader is not acceptable.

That still leaves the “...is there some military need...” that a different variant Free Trader can fill?

James Cain had a number ideas he posted above, as did Garth Getgen post for a Supply tender.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, March 18, 2021 - 01:35 pm: Edit

1. An upgrade to phaser-2s, assuming that were possible, exactly how much of an improvement over the two existing phaser-3s would it be? Not forgetting that the phaser-2s require twice the power to use to their full potential.

2. Am engine upgrade. So the ship must take more time to disengage? A Free Trader does not want to fight. Be it noted that this was one of the reasons Free Q-ships did not work, if the Q-ship was not trying to disengage, Orions smelled a rat. The refit added to some militarized versions (using the hull to land on planets, e.g., Free Tanker and Free Trooper) is justified by the mission. Maneuvering with the Assault force (not being a ball and chain slowing the assault force up).

3. Barges, as noted these do not require engines able to move the ship to disengagement speeds. So an old freighter can accomplish the task quite adequately if it needs to be accomplished and I cannot see planets/colonies/bases that are going to have a lot of traffic not having a traffic control system to arrange to replenish a ship while it is making a cargo delivery. So I do not see any real need for the unit other than as a target for raiders to kill for extra victory points.

4. A Civilian luxury executive transport with more powerful engines is burning money to no purpose to have engines more powerful than the Standard Trader.