I haven't gotten that far yet in my drawing. I'm still in the mental visualization stage, trying to plan what goes where. I put windows on the 3D model and would love to be able to align the rooms to those (I can also tweak the 3D model, of course). I know I'll lose a bit of room for the deflector dish equipment room, but I think there's still plenty of space for crew quarters.

I do need to figure out what the max number of crew are allowed to include adding in Commander's Options. If anyone has those numbers, please do post the answer.


Garth L. Getgen

By Mike Bennett (Mike) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 07:27 pm: Edit

Just a side note. I think it would be cool to have "deck" plans for a ground base.

I was reading Norm's Genesis thread and an idea came to me. Remember the old sci-fi thriller, The Thing from Outer Space (James Arness as the plant creature). It took place at a remote scientific outpost near the north pole. How about if a role-playing scenario was designed along similar lines, but with a SFU ground base instead?

Or has this been done to death???

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Garth, COI adds are 10 BP, 2 commando, 2 HWS, and 4 crew for 11 additional crew units...but tht's what the cargo bay is for...

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 08:05 pm: Edit

Stewart: The APT can only have 4 BPV worth of Commander's Options so the maximum amount of extra personnel carried is 40 (8 BP or 4 crew units or some combination thereof). Doubling the crew is still a impressive feat.

By Mike Bennett (Mike) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 10:22 pm: Edit

Richard, where did you get that information about how the APT can only have 4 BPV worth of Commander's Options?

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 11:01 pm: Edit

Mike: See (S3.211) which lists the CO points as 20% of (adjusted) combat BPV. Combat BPV of an APT is 20 and 20% of that is 4.

Not too many adjustments to significantly increase APT combat BPV since no refits or fighters are available.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Monday, June 29, 2015 - 11:48 pm: Edit

Thanks, Richard. "Doubling the crew is still a impressive feat." That's what bunk-beds are for.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 09:06 am: Edit

Still, adding that many bodies to what is already alledged to be a crowded ship at the normal staffing of 35 to 44 bodies will only compound the problem.

8 crew units gives us a range of 75 to 84 bodies. If we go with the 12 cabin number in a earlier post, that makes the per room number something between 6 or 7. (84/12=7)

Doable if each cabin comes equipped with 4 bunk beds in a single quad stack and there is room for 2 cots or pads onthe deck.

I have visions of a warrant officer standing beside each bathroom with a stopwatch to ensue that no one takes more than 5 minute shower.

(Grin)

By Jack Bohn (Jackbohn) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 10:13 am: Edit

Besides the showers themselves, water recycling (and air, and food): excess installed capacity, or hookups to add a second "unit" for higher occupancy?

We could have the bridge at least sticking out into the "hat" by sitting it on the computer core, which is a half meter to 1.5 m taller than convenient, we'd have to climb some steps up into the bridge. It might even be a split-level bridge, depending on how far the center has to dip to avoid the phaser ball and its control machinery. Would the weapons control room be incorporated into the bridge -- not quite under the pile of dirty laundry, but somewhat unused? Or would it need its own separate closet? I forget if that phosgene gas or whatever in that one episode is a characteristic problem of phaser control, or incidental.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 11:36 am: Edit

You know, when Garth started this topic out, my first thought, (after remembering the long drawn out discussion of the POL environmental water systems, sewage recycling and effluent issues), was that this would be easier because of the smaller crew.

It looks like it will be just as detailed and challenging as the POL was.

And no, I will not volunteer to be the one plotting out where every pipe, valve and clean out of the plumbing system is located!

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 07:35 pm: Edit

Well Jeff I am sorry to say the Captain as put you in charge of the plumbing system on board the ship. good luck!!!!

By Stewart Frazier (Frazikar2) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 07:39 pm: Edit

Small hulls sometimes have more problems than bigger ones as space is at a premium ... balancing space required for the crew and all the equipment (plus a little 'extra' in case of passengers/special cargo)...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - 08:34 pm: Edit

Vandor, I will work to make certain that the bathroom in the captains cabin works well.

You know, for a practical joker, there are lots of things one could do for a prank.

In a terrestrial North American plumbing system, the supply system is pressured to 32/lbs per square inch, the drain system is based on gravity... I imagine for star ships (even civilian types like the APT) the drains need to be pressure systems as well.

Now I don't mind doing a job that needs doing, but just think of the possibilities what a little compressed air and effluent could provide!

(grin)

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 06:34 am: Edit

Today I disassembled and cleaned out a carpet cleaning machine, which I think is actually worse than the macerating unit I had to replace earlier this year, or the sewer drain I had to replace a couple years back. Maybe it's a matter of expectations. Anyway, the trick is that most of the macerator tank is full of poop sludge, but it's liquid. The sewer drain smells bad, but there's nothing special about it beyond that. The carpet cleaner is full of carpet fibers, which cause all the goop to stick together, and to everything else. Even if there's less of the poop in the goop in the loop, you'll get sicker quicker when the icky is sticky.

Anyway, the ships have artificial gravity, so as long as the waste recycling facility is lower than the head, you could use gravity drains. Of course, there's probably at least one head that isn't in the right place, and it would have to have a special vacuum drain. Along with any drain that must still work even if the gravity is nonstandard. Perhaps in the sickbay, lab, shuttlebay, and machine shop.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 07:46 am: Edit

Sheap,
I feel for ya, buddy!
A lot depends on just where the carpet cleaning device operates in Normally.

In most residential locations, its a bad stinky smelly job at best.

A day care center, or worse senior care facility would be an order of magnitude worse.

But as to your assumption that gravity always works, without fail under all conditions... that may be step too far When talking about how star ships work in space. Yes, it would be cheaper, easier and simpler to plan out a gravity drain system, but were talking about shps that have multiple decks spread out in three dimensions that could have detached sections (federation saucer sections not to mention secondary hulls).

I suspect that the drains may resemble a built in central vacume home system than drains where there mustbe a defined slope or pitch to allow solid and liquid wastes to flow up, down, and thru hundreds of meters of star ship structure.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 12:11 pm: Edit

Jeff, before I had my house re-plumbed they tested the water pressure, and ours is at 65 PSI, so I'm wondering where you got that 32 PSI as the standard.

Sheap, talk about learning something every day. I had never heard of a macerating unit. That's something my brother could have used. He wanted a powered room in the basement, but the builder told him it was below the sewer line and they couldn't do it. Come to fine out when they dug to connect to the sewer, it was six feet deeper than what they were told .....

Bonus image for the week: http://i1170.photobucket.com/albums/r528/Getgen/Shuttles_Fighters_SWACs.gif~original

I drafted the admin shuttle way back in 1995 or so and based it as closely as humanly possible from the Franz Joseph tech manual. The F-18 on the left was likewise done as closely to ADB's clip art as I could make it. The heavy shuttle is, of course, simply a modified copy of the admin shuttle (although I tweaked it more to make it look less pancaked), and the SWACs are a very simply mod to the base shuttles. The attack shuttles are my own design (but I borrowed ADB's drone design) for my non-SFB Multi-Role Cruiser project.

I'm running errands today but I do hope to get back to work on the APT tonight. Last night I fixed an error in the basic hull and started to fit the transporter in. I had it done but then noticed that I had to add T-bombs, so it looks like I need to move the whole thing next to the shuttle bay.


Garth L. Getgen

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 01:16 pm: Edit

Garth, your "Bonus image for the week" reminds me of a question regarding drones that I never remenber to ask. I guess I'll ask it now (in the appropriate topic).

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 03:36 pm: Edit

Garth,
Back in the day(mid 1970's) my parents built a home in northern illinois. code requirements for minimal water service specified 32 psi from the commnunity municiple water department, though I imagine things may have changed, and its not impossible that different communities have different standards.

The reason I remember it, is the water softner installer took the time to answer some of my questions. I had a hard time understanding why there had to be both a hot water tank installed as well as a cold water supply tank, both of which required preasure regulators and gauges which showed the internal home water system using 65 psi to 98 psi.

Near as I can tell, the water softner system required a higher psi to function properly... but as a 12 year old I simply didn't comprehend all of the explanation.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 06:10 pm: Edit

I would believe the plumbing on star ships would have pumps and pressure systems. Being a enclosed system nothing worse then a sewage leak. Those in the navy might understand more as well.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 08:16 pm: Edit

Now, there is an idea I haven't tried... uhmm errf arrhhgh.. thought of. (Yeah, sure, that's right!)

I wonder what would happen if one were to reverse the local 1 G gravity field in a area, oh heck, the size of a crew quarters with an attached single occupant bath room equipped with a gravity waste water drain system?!?

Now let's see, slirdarian Corporalsquarters are located in section... cross frame about there...

And the soft ware chages to effect the desired conditions would be this. That and oh my look at the time!

By A. David Merritt (Adm) on Wednesday, July 01, 2015 - 08:28 pm: Edit

Slidarian Corporal; Someone wants to be used as a scrub brush.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Thursday, July 02, 2015 - 12:12 am: Edit

Not just a sewage leak. Just a simple water leak could get into electronics resulting in unfavorable events.

And if the artificial gravity needs to be turned off, it could prove fatal. Consider a compartment with an inch of water on the floor. Have the ship accelerate by several gravities. Watch the water run up the wall and then transform into a missile when the acceleration changes.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, July 02, 2015 - 02:02 am: Edit

Got some work done today. As always, placing the stairwells is a royal pain. What looks great on deck one screws up deck two, and vice versa.

I put the transporter on deck one with the T-bomb storage between the pads and the shuttle bay, but I am considering moving it to deck three directly below the shuttle bay (that extends to deck two).

I spent most of my time working on the crew areas on deck two. It's coming along, but for a while it seemed like I was taking two steps back for every three I made forward. At least the net result was more done when I put it away than when I started. It's not always like that.


Garth L. Getgen

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, July 02, 2015 - 06:24 am: Edit

Garth,
You might want to make a notation that the t bomb storage on a civilian APT can be used for some other function.

Just a thought, but given that the ship only has one transporter, it might make sense to place it on deck two instead of deck one. That way, in a combat situation, it would closer to where the ships security personel quarters are located. (This is a guess, but you said earlier that the bridge and captains quarters were on deck one).

A second reason would be that loading and unloading cargo and passengers would be easier from deck two.

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Thursday, July 02, 2015 - 10:51 am: Edit

Except that deck two is the cargo high-bay, so it'd be easier to do that on deck three. ;-)


Garth L. Getgen