Re: [FT] Tug confusion

Jared spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> Well, here's the rub - what you designed is valid by the rules, but
not
> practical by the text.  The average FTL transit consists of a series
of jumps,
> with delays of 6+ hours between them, while "on average, naval vessels
on most
> missions will make no more than one jump per day".  The tug has no
provisions
> for the fighter crew, or refueling, or rearming.  So essentially the
pilots are
> stuck in their fighters for the entire duration.  They must rely on
the Life
> support ability of said fighters.  They have at most their initial
endurance of
> 6 (or 9 if long-range) but I would hotly contend that extended
deep-space travel
> burns endurance.  And once there, they use it up and are screwed.

Or the fighters' crews die in Jump..... 
 
> Also, tugs may not be able to use their own drives to tow the fighters
in
> realspace (read FB p8 - "designed to tow other ships through jump by
extendind
> their jumpfield around them".  So you need mechanical linakge, or else
the
> fighters use their own drives for all maneuvering.

I assume these were the clamps referred to. 
 
> So while it is strictly by the book, there are complications that make
this
> design (as it stands) impractical for anything but moving fighters
around behind
> the lines.  It could be an interesting scenario for this
transportation group to
> be attacked, but as far as normal play, I don't think so.

I made up a Mobile Fleet Repair Dock using these rules for my version 
of the NI capable of working on a mass 110 battlecruiser, and towing 
it in both Jump and realspace (actually, the MFRD could tow probably 
two of these things, but couldn't jump that heavily loaded). That 
wasn't too bad for practicality - pretty fast in normal space when no 
vessel was under work, otherwise speed 1. And I loaded up with extra 
BPs (which I called Repair Parties). This ship struck me as entirely 
too useful to any fleet on the move that didn't want to scrap every 
ship with major damage. 

As for Noam's Jump Carrier, the only place I can see it used 
(assuming the fighter LS endurance lets the Pilots survive jump) 
would be for a final assault jump into a contested system - where 
you'd had a fleet marshalling point with freighters full of fighters 
to load a wave or two of these "Jump Ferries" with fighters and crews 
in preparation for an all-out assault. But this would happen rarely, 
and even then an ambush against an unready force would be 
devastating. And you'd only want this as a "stiffener" to a fleet - 
to add more firepower in the early stage of a big assault. You'd have 
to win or your fighters would probably be abandoned. And Pilots are 
not cheap enough to just be thrown away. So, I don't see this as a 
commonly used design. 

Just my 0.02. If the "construction" rules don't prohibit a design, we 
still have to assess its strategic use and the complexities of that 
issue - that explain why we see a lot less "single purpose" killer 
ships in the FB - the ships are all expected to do various types of 
duties for which a single purpose ship is poorly designed. 

Tom. 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/