FTL Drives in Terran Empire

[TheImperialKhan]

Why do the ships in Terran Empire have two FTL drives?

 

Okay it's a given that Terran Empire is a space opra style setting. I'm pretty familiar with this type of setting and I can't ever recall seeing this before.

 

I have no problem about the idea of different races having different FTL drives. But that's not what we have here. We have one race using two different FTL drives at the same time and in the same ships no less.

 

Why?

 

I'd really like to know why Jim or Steve or whoever, decided to do this. Preferably by whoever made the decision.

 

I could see the idea of the Empire using one drive in the 25th Century and switching to a more efficient one by the 27th, but I can't understand why you would have two roughly equal systems operating together. Most people would pick one or the other.

 

BTW I'm talking from a story standpoint not a game mechanics one.

[Monolith]

If you read the descriptions on the drives you will see that the two drives are somewhat different. Displacer drives make instantaneous leaps, but those leaps take 4 hours to set up and you can only do 6 a day (and only 4 a day safely). The leaps also require a technician to program in the directions. Hyperdrives, on the other hand, are basically like flying through hyperspace. Both drives have a limitation as to how close they can be to a planet before use (displacer drives can be half the distance closer).

 

If you read the text you would see that basically only military ships have both. The Displacers can go farther but the extra time needed to make a jump makes them virtually useless if needing to escape from a combat situation. So, military ships have Hyperdrive backups for when they need to get away fast.

 

The information on pages 158-161 can explain this better.

[Steve Long]

Since Monolith has been so kind to explain it, I don't have to.

[TheImperialKhan]

Originally posted by Monolith

If you read the descriptions on the drives you will see that the two drives are somewhat different. Displacer drives make instantaneous leaps, but those leaps take 4 hours to set up and you can only do 6 a day (and only 4 a day safely). The leaps also require a technician to program in the directions. Hyperdrives, on the other hand, are basically like flying through hyperspace. Both drives have a limitation as to how close they can be to a planet before use (displacer drives can be half the distance closer).

 

If you read the text you would see that basically only military ships have both. The Displacers can go farther but the extra time needed to make a jump makes them virtually useless if needing to escape from a combat situation. So, military ships have Hyperdrive backups for when they need to get away fast.

 

The information on pages 158-161 can explain this better.

 

See the problem is military ships wouldn't have both. These are starships and space is at a premium. Think of how much more powerfull weapons or shields or stl combat drives they could mount if they didn't have a second full-sized ftl drive.

 

Logically they would only use the Hyperdrive and use the space that they've freed up to uprate the combat systems. I know that according to the vehicle rules you don't have to do it this way. But it just makes more sense to think of it like this to me.

 

The Displacer Drive would be good for civilian ships on high speed runs. But if you absolutely have to have two ftl drives then use two Displacers one standard sized and one small back-up with a limited range for hoping out of trouble again on a pre-programed escape jump.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

See the problem is military ships wouldn't have both. These are starships and space is at a premium. Think of how much more powerfull weapons or shields or stl combat drives they could mount if they didn't have a second full-sized ftl drive.

 

Logically they would only use the Hyperdrive and use the space that they've freed up to uprate the combat systems. I know that according to the vehicle rules you don't have to do it this way. But it just makes more sense to think of it like this to me.

Weapon power and technology is limited by the ATRI scale. Humans are pretty much capped at 11, thus they cannot create more powerful weapons or shields yet.

 

The Displacer Drive would be good for civilian ships on high speed runs. But if you absolutely have to have two ftl drives then use two Displacers one standard sized and one small back-up with a limited range for hoping out of trouble again on a pre-programed escape jump.

It would do no good to have two Displacer drives, due to the fact that it takes 4 hours to activate it. If you do not have 4 hours, such as when in combat or trying to evade someone, you cannot use a Displacer drive. The advantage of the Hyperdrive is that you can activate it virtually instantly (take us to warp Mr. Sulu).

 

The real advantage of the Displacer drive is that it is much faster than a Hyperdrive. A Class Nu Hyperdrive can travel 3,360 ly per week. A type 20 Displacer drive can travel 4,200 ly per week, and has the potential to travel 6,300 ly per week. When you consider that Earth to Adamant is some 35,000+ ly do you want the fleet to get there in 6-7 weeks or 11 when the Ackalian's fleet crosses the neutral zone?

 

Most non-military ships will have one or the other, depending on their purpose. But even then I can still see some civilian ships having a use for both. The big disadvantage to Displacer Drives are that they are energy hogs. That x10 END cost will add up in ships with smaller Power Systems.

[Herolover]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

See the problem is military ships wouldn't have both. These are starships and space is at a premium. Think of how much more powerfull weapons or shields or stl combat drives they could mount if they didn't have a second full-sized ftl drive.

 

Logically they would only use the Hyperdrive and use the space that they've freed up to uprate the combat systems. I know that according to the vehicle rules you don't have to do it this way. But it just makes more sense to think of it like this to me.

 

I am somewhat knowledgeable in the military area of things and it is common for ships today to have two or even three different methods of providing energy for movement.

 

Take a current Nuclear submaraine as an example. Yes, it has one propeller, but it has several different methods of turning that propeller.

 

Military ships, at least the capital ships, are very expensive and important. I would say that it would seem plausible that ships would have very big displacer drives, used for the majority of travel, with small hyperdrives used in emergencies.

 

Which would you drather have a 50 million dollar battleship that couldn't get out of a fight quickly or one that could?

[Talon]

I thought this was a good example of applying game-world "realism" to ship design. It seems to me that FTL speed is the absolute most important thing in an interstellar military vessel -- if the enemy can outdistance you, he can play all sorts of flanking and feinting tricks, then strike at an unprotected system (or mass his fleet against a weakly defended one).

[TheImperialKhan]

This has become a fairly interesting discussion I think.

 

Monolith the ATRI caps the sophistication of the systems there are ways around the power issue. Example: A stick of Dynamite is never going to have any more punch than it has, whether is was made in 1900 or 2000 but if I were to bundle up 3-5 sticks I'll still get a bigger boom without changing the tech one bit. And even if I can't alter the energy absorbtion/disapation rates of the Shields without a boost in the ATRI I can still increase the thickness of the armor and reinforce the hull to better withstand damage; although at the cost of mass and space.

 

Herolover I think you're making the very common mistake of confusing Propulsion with Powerplant. Yes you are correct, a Nuclear Sub has more than one powerplant (the reactor, a diesel-electric generator and the batteries iirc) but it still only has one engine system that makes it move.

 

All of this is just rationalization to explain a decision that was made to give starships two FTL drives anyway. That's really what I was asking about. Why did Jim or Steve or whoever want to give starships two FTL drives.

 

Personally I would have given Hyperdrive to one Empire and the Displacer Drive to the other. The pluses and minuses of each system would have made things interesting. But that's just the way I would have done it. I'm wondering why the people making Terran Empire made the decision that they did to have two FTL drives in one ship.

 

Sorry if I wasn't being clear on that.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

And even if I can't alter the energy absorbtion/disapation rates of the Shields without a boost in the ATRI I can still increase the thickness of the armor and reinforce the hull to better withstand damage; although at the cost of mass and space.

I think you are slightly missing the point of the ATRI scale. What you are seeing in the defense packages, propulsion packages, weapons packages, etc, is the best you can have. If you have +38 hull plating, then that is the best allowed within the confines of what humans can create at ATRI 11. You cannot just say "slap on more armor, or build a bigger Force Field. Thus an ATRI 9 culture like the Fex does not have the technological expertise to create even the basic Defense Package 1 (an ATRI 10 technology) let alone a Defense Package 5.

 

I'm wondering why the people making Terran Empire made the decision that they did to have two FTL drives in one ship.

And the answer is still the same: Because each drive does something differently. Some ships have Hyperdrives, some ships have Displacer Drives, and military ships have both for backup and for versatility.

[BobGreenwade]

My general impression is that they are sort of like the Warp and Impulse drives on Star Trek -- or more precisely, one for "helmsman, take us to our next destination," and the other for "get us the heck away from this supernova!" Each has its own abilities and limitations, and the captain must choose between the two based on what he's trying to do.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by BobGreenwade

Each has its own abilities and limitations, and the captain must choose between the two based on what he's trying to do.

That's basically it. For example, a starship with a Type 7 or higher Displacer Drive needs to move a minimum of 10 LY per jump. That means a warship with only a Displacer Drive could not travel between the Earth and Alpha Centauri (2.5 LY, approx). So if you give a warship just a Displacer Drive it cannot easily travel short distances, but if you give it just a Hyperdrive it does not have the speed to get to the other side of the empire in a timely fashion. So important ships need to have both.

[Talon]

Another good reason is that you can theoretically hang out in Hyperspace and do funky stuff (smuggling, hack into nav beacons, prepare for an assault, etc.). A military ship that couldn't jump into hyperspace would be unable to stop such activities, turning hyperspace into a safe haven for bad guys.

[TheImperialKhan]

Originally posted by Monolith

I think you are slightly missing the point of the ATRI scale. What you are seeing in the defense packages, propulsion packages, weapons packages, etc, is the best you can have. If you have +38 hull plating, then that is the best allowed within the confines of what humans can create at ATRI 11. You cannot just say "slap on more armor, or build a bigger Force Field. Thus an ATRI 9 culture like the Fex does not have the technological expertise to create even the basic Defense Package 1 (an ATRI 10 technology) let alone a Defense Package 5.

 

 

Not necessarily so. Take a modern anti-tank missile for example. There's no way simple stone battlements of an ancient castle can stop that, but make those same battlements 10 times thicker and they will stop that missile. You can always add armor the question is whether or not it's practical to do so.

 

Originally posted by Monolith

And the answer is still the same: Because each drive does something differently. Some ships have Hyperdrives, some ships have Displacer Drives, and military ships have both for backup and for versatility.

 

By that logic military aircraft should have both props (for fuel economy) and jets (for speed). And ships should still have sails and oars. Admittedly in the early Jet and Steam Ages this was so but the practice died out after a while as it was inefficient.

 

Military vessels tend to be optimized for the mission that they're assigned. In the case of Battleships to slug it out toe-to-toe with the enemy. A second FTL drive does not contribute to that mission. Now I could see a few cases where it might make sense to have a dual FTL system, mostly for fast raider type cruisers who's mission would be in part to scout out the enemy as well as to raid them. And also for purpose built Scouts of course. But for main battle units it makes more sense to mount more energy weapons, bigger missile magazines, more launchers and so on.

[TheImperialKhan]

Originally posted by Geoff Speare

Another good reason is that you can theoretically hang out in Hyperspace and do funky stuff (smuggling, hack into nav beacons, prepare for an assault, etc.). A military ship that couldn't jump into hyperspace would be unable to stop such activities, turning hyperspace into a safe haven for bad guys.

 

A good reason for leaving the Main Fleet with Hyperdrives and save the Displacers for specialized Scout/Raider vessels.

[sbarron]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

Military vessels tend to be optimized for the mission that they're assigned. In the case of Battleships to slug it out toe-to-toe with the enemy. A second FTL drive does not contribute to that mission...

 

...But for main battle units it makes more sense to mount more energy weapons, bigger missile magazines, more launchers and so on.

That depends on your military doctrine. Obviously, the Terran Empire has a different doctrine concerning how they use their battleships than do the Imperial Kahn's forces.

 

There have been several rational explanations given as to why the Terran Empire chose to give their military ships both FTL drives. Just because because you don't agree with them, IK, doesn't mean they aren't valid.

[TheImperialKhan]

^^^ True but it doesn't mean my question's been answered either.

 

I'd still like to know why Jim or Steve or whoever wanted to use two FTL Drives on the same ships in the first place.

[Talon]

Different situation, different rules.

 

Planes, being small, are easily specialized. Sails and oars are a silly argument -- they affect design too much, are neutralized too easily, and don't provide significant benefit. If Hyperdrive or Displacer drives had competing design requirements there might be a similar issue -- but in the Terran Empire universe (which is space opera after all!), this isn't the case.

 

Actually, sails and oars are a great argument -- when those were the primary methods of propulsion, you found both on many military and ships, because each offered a significant advantage over the other. Ship designs were highly skewed to provide for both (trireme, for example).

[Shaun Hendricks]

The driving force...

 

This was kind of touched on in a couple of previous posts but perhaps not to the extent it should have been pointed out.

 

Larger Military Vessels, would likely have two different drives as they would be 'multi-role'. They could go into hyperspace as well as 'jump'. The advantage on 'jump' is that a ship (or battle fleet) can get form point A to point B without risking intervention. "Poof!" you're there and ready to rock. However, that's a problem as well, you can't intercept someone in hyperspace with a jump drive. Pirates would eat your civilian traffic (using hyperspace drives) alive. Combat can occur in hyperspace as well, or at least I didn't read that it couldn't. Depends on the detailed definition.

 

The issue that two drives would take up too much space would be far more relevant to smaller vessels, say, frigate or smaller. That's where you'd probably find more specialization. System defense/patrol ships might only have hyperspace drives so they can respond to ships in distress as rapidly as possible. System scout ships might have a single displacer so they can hop between systems in a fairly rapid fashion to patrol larger routes. Missle cruisers might only have displacer drives to 'jump' into a system, commence long-range bombardment and jump out again to reload. Anti-piracy cruisers might only have hyper-drives to nab the bad guys and enough guns to take 'em down.

 

I suppose, the way I'd look at it, is what is the role of the ship and then decide if the role needs two drives or not or if one would suffice. BTW- redundancy under the old Hero rules was cheap, 5 points got you a redundant system- both systems can't be engaged at the same time though, that would cost full points. I haven't seen this under the new rules yet, so either I missed it or I am missing a supplement that describes it. Not a bad option for starships to have available.

[Haerandir]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

^^^ True but it doesn't mean my question's been answered either.

 

I'd still like to know why Jim or Steve or whoever wanted to use two FTL Drives on the same ships in the first place.

 

Well, Steve did say that Monolith gave the same answer he would have, so that's out of the way.

 

The problem is that you're trying to turn a discussion on strategy into a simple mathematical equation. More guns/armor is not always the best solution to a military problem. The Terran Empire has chosen to emphasize speed and flexibility over raw power. That's a valid strategy, particularly since (as I understand it), the Terran Empire is not currently engaged in a major defensive war or cold war buildup, and doesn't expect to routinely fight opponents who can match their firepower. Under those circumstances, it's quite logical to subscribe to a naval doctrine that's better suited to policing a large volume of space and taking on less well-equipped opponents. You don't need the power to destroy a sun to suppress pirates or insurgents. You do need to be able to gather all of your dispersed anti-piracy patrols to respond to an unexpected threat, and being able to outmaneuver your foes once you get there is easily important as the ability to blow away a single ship in one massive salvo.

 

So, the question is, which is more inefficient: Two drive systems which allow you to customize your ability to move according to the tactical situation, or guns which will never fire, either because you can't catch your opponent, or you blew him away with 25% of your armament?

 

I mean, if you want to ignore tactical realities in order to pack more boom into your ship, that's fine with me. But if we get into a war, don't complain to me because my 'inefficient' and 'poorly designed' ships routinely outmaneuver you and blow up your planets.

[Starwolf]

The Imperial Kahn said

"By that logic military aircraft should have both props (for fuel economy) and jets (for speed). And ships should still have sails and oars. Admittedly in the early Jet and Steam Ages this was so but the practice died out after a while as it was inefficient.

"

 

Some aircraft do have both, the P3 Orion and the C130 for example, they use props for extended long range flight, and the JATO system (JET ASSISTED TAKE OFF) for take off from very short runways.

 

The modern aircraft carrier also has 4 engines, be they nuclear or diesel to drive the screws. Typically they only use 1, 2, or 3 engines at once. In my 18 years in the Navy I only saw all four MMRs online simultaneously once.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

Not necessarily so. Take a modern anti-tank missile for example. There's no way simple stone battlements of an ancient castle can stop that, but make those same battlements 10 times thicker and they will stop that missile. You can always add armor the question is whether or not it's practical to do so.

Once again, I think you are completely missing what ATRI means. The difference here is not having 1 foot of steel plating or 2 feet. In HERO terms the extra foot would probably only add +1 DEF. The difference here is how they make the hull plating. You need to have a certain technology level to create metals of that durability.

 

Humans have an ATRI rating of 11. What you see in the book is the best that their technology can create at that point in time. Societies who have a 12 rating are better and have better ships systems. Societies with lower ratings are much worse.

 

Using the Fex as an example, their ATRI 9 technology rating means that the best Hyperdrive they can create allows them to go 250 LY per week. They cannot even create Reactionless or Displacer Drives. Humans, with their ATRI 11 rating, have Hypedrives which go 480 LY per day. It takes a Fex ship 2 weeks to cover what a human ship does in a day.

 

This same tech scale drifts down to weapons and defenses. The best ship's laser system the Fex can create is a Mark 1 (4d6 RKA). Fex cannot create Plasma Cannons or Tractor Beams. Humans, on the other hand, have a Mark XX laser system (10d6 AP RKA), and also have Plasma Cannons and Tractor Beams. Humans can create ship's Force Fields, Fex cannot. Humans have more durable metals which allow them to boost the ship's hull, Fex do not. This is not a question of just making space to add bigger weapons, or just putting thicker armor on the hulls. You need to have the technology rating to be able to create those improvements.

 

Military vessels tend to be optimized for the mission that they're assigned. In the case of Battleships to slug it out toe-to-toe with the enemy. A second FTL drive does not contribute to that mission.

Once again, the ability to be able to "warp" out of a losing battle in a few seconds is much better than having to survive the attacks for 4 hours while your pilot and the ship's computer plots you a course. The versatility that both of those drives brings to a military ship is a huge advantage.

[DigitalGolem]

Originally posted by TheImperialKhan

^^^ True but it doesn't mean my question's been answered either.

 

I'd still like to know why Jim or Steve or whoever wanted to use two FTL Drives on the same ships in the first place.

 

I think there's also an economic angle to this. If the Terran Empire (or anyone else) decides that their ships will only have one drive or the other, then they'll need to build, maintain and deploy two completely different fleets, with very different capabilities. And each fleet would have its budget reduced by the needs of the other.

 

DGv3.0

[Shaun Hendricks]

ATRI Problems... and solutions!

 

I'd walk carefully through the idea of mixing ATTACK, DEF and other concepts into technology relativity. You run into some really nasty problems. However, you also gain some keen build issues that can make things more real.

 

It's true that ATRI can 'cap' things like hyperdrive distances, or speeds or even dice of damage. What isn't true is that lower ATRI items cannot harm or do significantly less damage than higher ATRI items.

 

Example: A knight in plate mail might as well be wearing tissue paper when facing an opponent with a decent sized gun, but smaller guns may bounce just the same as swords and such. The reverse is also true, that a person wearing kevlar is not invulnerable to say, a crossbow, because they aren't (A nice, sharp, stilletto-point bolt will cut through kevlar like butter). Weapon/Def being solely limited by ATRI is NOT a good idea. It can be 'generally' true, but hardly always. Instead, what you need to do is build the weapon and defense according to the concept it holds to. The concept is bound by ATRI limits and principles, of course, but even then, there are exceptions.

 

It's also possible for a race/culture to cross ATRI boundaries in areas, meaning they could be ATRI 9 in ship technology but ATRI 11 in computer-tech or genetic-tech (this is an extreme separation, but possible). An example of this is WWII America. Our weapons were roughly the same as our opponents, yet we jumped an ATRI level when we detonated a nuclear weapon. All of our weapons didn't suddenly hop up a level in ATRI, instead, it took 30 years for us to develop the kind of armaments we use today. So we were 'crossing' ATRI boundaries at that time. With the way technology is advancing, we could concievably cross another ATRI boundary again in a couple of decades...

 

Design accordingly.

[Monolith]

Re: ATRI Problems... and solutions!

 

Originally posted by Shaun Hendricks

What isn't true is that lower ATRI items cannot harm or do significantly less damage than higher ATRI items.

I have a feeling that when you see the example of the Varanyi starships, along with their ATRI 12 technology, you might change your mind about that.

[Shaun Hendricks]

Re: Re: ATRI Problems... and solutions!

 

Originally posted by Monolith

I have a feeling that when you see the example of the Varanyi starships, along with their ATRI 12 technology, you might change your mind about that.

 

I was talking in game system terms. 8RPD is 8RPD... no matter what ATRI it comes from.

 

The only adjusters there are conceptual.