Colonial Fleets Battlestar Stats

CBSG4ever · February 20th, 2011, 02:35 PM

Greetings,
This thread is being started to support a Colonial Technical Manual for the TOS Battlestar Galactica universe proposed by our very own Taranis. The aim of this discussion is to flesh out the statistics of a Battlestar for any current of future endeavors for the fanbase.

In the "Tecnical Manual" thread, Taranis spoke of several topics that were on his mind and that needed answering. Here is his excerpt:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis

these are questions I would like to address .......

Scale
Crew complement
how are the colonies arranged.

where all the weapons of the Galactica are located

where are the shuttle stored

where is the food stored

what is the duration of a standard voyage of a battlestar.

there are lots

this is where we as a fan base can address these questions
and hopefully create an expanded universe for it.

for example

the Viper Complement of a Battlestar

we have read and heard that it 75 viper

OK that's fine ,.... but using the 6080 scale of the Galactica
I would put 75 vipers in each launch bay bring it up to 150 vipers

the Cylon Basestar has 300 Raiders ..... so a battlestar been half the size should have half the fighter complement too

As you can see, a few things have already been discussed. Please feel free to add your own thoughts to this. We want to make sure we get this as accurate as possible. Feel free to discuss, disagree or correct anything here.

OK, lets start this off.

1. Scale
In the "Galactica Length Question" thread, a size comparison was done. The best scale was determined to be the 6080 Ft size for a Battlestar. Here is the discussion.
https://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=17741
The "one nautical mile" stated by Larson/Dykstra does seem to work best.

2. Viper Compliment
We can infer from "The Hand of God" (Final Episode) that a Cylon Baseship has 300 fighters and that the Colonial Fighters would be outnumbered 2 to 1.
So, this would give the Galactica a compliment of 150 Vipers at the time of HoG. This much is certain.
I do remember seeing (somewhere, can't remember off hand) a standard compliment of 75 Fighters. At the time of the Final Destruction, the Galactica had recovered 67 fighters (25 of their own). The Pegasus fighter additions and replacement fighters would account for the boost in fighters. A personal side note. It seemed that the Galactica was able to handle the extra fighters without too much trouble. The total compliment figure could be up for some discussion. Could they carry more?

Crew Compliment.
This is something that I always had trouble figuring out. I'm not sure of the numbers. I guess that's why we're giving it a go to discuss it.

Just how large a crew did this ship have? Also, how were they divided up? (divisions, sections, departments, etc.)
An idea I had was to model the compliment setup roughly like a modern US Carrier. There's about 5,500 to 6,000 personnel aboard a Nimitz-class carrier. Roughly 2,500 are supporting the Air Wing and 3,500 actually run the ship. (I believe those to be somewhat correct. If not, please correct me)

My thoughts are these:
I envision 3 shifts in a work day. 1 shift is enough to perform the daily activities at a minimum. If there is an alert klaxon, ALL shifts report for duty. (This list is in no particular order.)

A) Command Staff: This would include Command, Ship Flight Control, Flight Opps, Communication, Navigation and Scanners.
Best guess: 300

B) Crew: Runs the day-to-day equipment and operations on the Battlestar. From the mess hall, laundry, Rejuvenation Center, O & E Club to the Turbo Washes & Flushes.

Guess-timate: 2000

C) Flight: This would include operations and personnel for the landing bays. The Pilots could be in this category. Crew for launch, recovery, rearming, refueling and maintenance of fighter/shuttle craft.
150 pilots + 50 (in training or reserve plus shuttle pilots)
2000 deck crew

D) Engineering: This would encompass Engine Operations, Life Support, Damage Control (fire suppression) and Repair & Maintenance of the ship.
Guess-timate: 1000

E) Medical/Research: This would include Life Station personnel and Labs (Technological & Biological).
300 to 500 personnel

F) Weapons/Security: The phrase "turrets manned and operational" seems to stick with me on a few episodes of BG. How many turrets? Manpower needed for each turret? Other types of weapons (Lasers) and crew requirements? Does the Galactica have "Shields" of some sort? Are there Colonial "Marines" or "Assault Warriors"?
This is a tough one.
I saw somewhere many, many years ago that there were 48 Twin Laser Turret Cannons on a Battlestar. (Fantastic Films Magazine?) Not sure how accurate that info is. If they are manned, I'd have to venture 2-3 per turret.
150 to 200 for all external weapons
100 to 200 Assault Warriors
(This is all a best guess from unknown or incomplete info and is welcome to debate.)

There would be Officers and Enlisted within each of these fields, of course.

I figure a rough compliment of about 6000 to 7000 personnel.
All of this is really off the top of my head and hoping it sounds reasonable. Am I way off base here? Comments? Thoughts? Suggestions? Corrections? Critiques? All are welcome, please.

Hope this is not too much to start off with and apologies on the length.

gmd3d · February 20th, 2011, 02:56 PM

First off. thanks for this.. CBSG4ever.

I like the numbers your coming up with and I think it will be easier as we see the Galactica in the same thread at the 6080
ft scale.

it should also help to see the other great ships in the Scifi universe.

this are scaled properly in Lightwave.....

over the course of this thread / Project. I hope to make some parts of the Internals area of the Galactica ....

focusing on the Launch and landing bays .. The Main Engine
where the bridge is located and also scaled.

so what do people think of my old design of the landing bays
these are huge containers alone .

so much of the space is taken up with the landing bay. which I will repost here.

that is a massive space. much would be given over Viper and Shuttle storage and also parts and other supplies .. Viper Crews barracks and supplies for them, I

But I will build a mock up to see what can be seen

I am also in favour of the 150 Viper compliment for a standard Battlestar. but 130 has also been mentioned....

gmd3d · February 21st, 2011, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CBSG4ever

E) Weapons/Security: The phrase "turrets manned and operational" seems to stick with me on a few episodes of BG. How many turrets? Manpower needed for each turret? Other types of weapons (Lasers) and crew requirements? Does the Galactica have "Shields" of some sort? Are there Colonial "Marines" or "Assault Warriors"?
This is a tough one.
I saw somewhere many, many years ago that there were 48 Twin Laser Turret Cannons on a Battlestar. (Fantastic Films Magazine?) Not sure how accurate that info is. If they are manned, I'd have to venture 2-3 per turret.
150 to 200 for all external weapons
100 to 200 Assault Warriors
(This is all a best guess from unknown or incomplete info and is welcome to debate.)

this is one that has stuck with me too,,,, "turrets manned and operational" . so there are gun crews,

this is an area I would like to work on. there are only one or two shots showing the Galactica firing ....

using the image of the model we can place them on the ship and map them out.

also there are 2 different types at least as far as I remember
the larger heavy cannons if you will...

I did have an image of that some years ago with a human figure to scale .... cannot find it now...

then there was what looked to be a lighter cannon above it.

another model I would like to build for this.

could they have been automated where the larger ones where crewed

Punisher454 · February 21st, 2011, 04:10 PM

I think there would be a central fire control center in a deep protected part of the ship (where the bridge really should be, but its cool with a physical window).
There would also need to be localized manual fire control stations for each gun in case the signaling is lost. Along with the auxiliary manual fire control there should be emergency energizers (generators) for each turret, just in case.
The reason for a centralized fire control center is to simplify co-ordination of the laser batteries. A centralized location also means the shortest average travel distance for these critical personnel to travel to their combat station.

The pilots I believe would be billeted in a central area of the ship where most crew members should have their quarters. The landing bay pods are work areas and also prime targets for attacks, people should not bunk there. we know they have rapid transit tunnels for the pilots to reach the launch bays.

Thats how I see it at least.

gmd3d · February 22nd, 2011, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punisher454

I think there would be a central fire control center in a deep protected part of the ship (where the bridge really should be, but its cool with a physical window).
There would also need to be localized manual fire control stations for each gun in case the signaling is lost. Along with the auxiliary manual fire control there should be emergency energizers (generators) for each turret, just in case.
The reason for a centralized fire control center is to simplify co-ordination of the laser batteries. A centralized location also means the shortest average travel distance for these critical personnel to travel to their combat station.

The pilots I believe would be billeted in a central area of the ship where most crew members should have their quarters. The landing bay pods are work areas and also prime targets for attacks, people should not bunk there. we know they have rapid transit tunnels for the pilots to reach the launch bays.

Thats how I see it at least.

all good points esp on the laser batteries and auxiliary manual fire control.

I kind of see a ready room / bunk room where pilots on stand by spend their time... and would be in numerous locations.
barracks if you will.

the main ones could be in the main structure as you mention but I would have 1 in each Pod or Bay ..... Bunk rooms.

this is how I always imagined it.

But that's what this project is for

to see if we can work out
something.

I will start work on the internal layout soon .... I need to finish one modelling project for 3dg soon,

peter noble · February 22nd, 2011, 07:34 AM

When comparing the crew of an aircraft carrier with a battlestar, because of the degree of computerisation in a battlestar, maybe, despite it's size, a battlestar can operate with less drew than everyone thinks it can.

Just a thought.

gmd3d · February 22nd, 2011, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peter noble

When comparing the crew of an aircraft carrier with a battlestar, because of the degree of computerisation in a battlestar, maybe, despite it's size, a battlestar can operate with less drew than everyone thinks it can.

Just a thought.

yes good point again ....

but I believe that given its size and complexity. there would need to be a somewhat large Support Engineering Crew.

Engineering Crew
Damage Control Crew

I like the 7000 number at the minimum and 10.000 max idea

but more toward the 7..

my thinking is that as the Colonials don´t use Droids or Robots. your going to need large numbers for sorting out damaged systems during combat situations and after the
repair crews. exception been Muffit of course

.

and with out leaving critical systems unmanned. even with
7000 or 10,000 crew its still a massive hulk. the largest single thing is the Main Engines and the Landing / launch bays
.
above the bays there is a lot of room... storage, spare-parts,
Fuel. Energizers

. Ready rooms. perhaps even temporary billets for troops.

again just ideas ... I going to explore all of this over the next few weeks ,

rough maps using the basic shape of the Galactica. I will post some of the shapes here so that members can also use some paint program to try there own ideas ....

I will show human and Viper shuttle to add the scale ..

Thunderstruck · February 23rd, 2011, 06:54 AM

maybe not needed but I came across a TECH Guide to BG
weapons.

https://www.tecr.com/galactica/weapons/weapons.htm

gmd3d · February 23rd, 2011, 06:59 AM

Yeah have that site booked marked ...... but forgot about it

I wish to expanded on it if possible ..... and map out where logically you would place the Laser weapons on the Galactica....

Reaper · February 25th, 2011, 06:03 PM

here is my take on the 2 differnt laser turrets shown in the series. I concider the smaller barrel laser turret to be dedicated anti starfighter armaments. These lasers are only powerful enough to take out raiders.

The other turrets, the ones with the beefier barrels are alot more powerful, although used for anti starfighter tasks, these are the turrets that also fire on capital ships. I've always thought that when firing on raiders, the turrets are powered down, say to 1/8th full power, more then enough to splatter a Raider, but barely taking a chunck out of the laser capasiters.

When the battlestar (or any Colonial ship) enages a basestar, these guns power up to full and can do some damage to the basestar.

what do you guys think?

gmd3d · February 26th, 2011, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper

here is my take on the 2 differnt laser turrets shown in the series. I concider the smaller barrel laser turret to be dedicated anti starfighter armaments. These lasers are only powerful enough to take out raiders.

The other turrets, the ones with the beefier barrels are alot more powerful, although used for anti starfighter tasks, these are the turrets that also fire on capital ships. I've always thought that when firing on raiders, the turrets are powered down, say to 1/8th full power, more then enough to splatter a Raider, but barely taking a chunck out of the laser capasiters.

When the battlestar (or any Colonial ship) enages a basestar, these guns power up to full and can do some damage to the basestar.

what do you guys think?

Yeah that does work... I like that thinking ..

I will be finishing my Large lasers soon and will work on the smaller ones...... soon as I find some really decent images

Punisher454 · February 27th, 2011, 12:42 AM

Perhaps the big turrets could also achieve a higher rate of fire by reducing the output. The hardware would heat up a lot less per shot, enabling more rapid firing, which is what you'd want for anti-aircraft type operation. Makes perfect sense.

gmd3d · February 27th, 2011, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punisher454

Perhaps the big turrets could also achieve a higher rate of fire by reducing the output. The hardware would heat up a lot less per shot, enabling more rapid firing, which is what you'd want for anti-aircraft type operation. Makes perfect sense.

good point ,, the design of the large Cannons I think support that thinking with the tube or piping around the main barrel. to deal with the high energy or heat..

We will when the time comes start to compile all the data and idea for these sections . once I have the full laser Cannon done I will place it into the 6080 ft ship and see what scale it is.

I did have a image on my old PC that showed a human figure for scale, but I have not been able to find it at all.... I will keep looking and hope for the best ..

gmd3d · February 27th, 2011, 03:44 AM

I found loads of BSG images on some of my old disc.... and the cannon image I was looking for was there.. so here you go

peter noble · February 28th, 2011, 12:06 PM

I looked at the schematic of the interior of the landing bay and it's a great place to start, but it doesn't take into account the actual set where the launch tube epenings are square on.

Might I sugest that the tube stars off straight but then curves to a diagonal?

The problem is with the show that things rarely match, on the set it looks like the launch rail has guifers along it that match the the indentations on the belly of the Viper, while in the VFX sequence the viper is on a separate trolley that runs on top of the rail.

How long is the launch tube anyway?

gmd3d · February 28th, 2011, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peter noble

I looked at the schematic of the interior of the landing bay and it's a great place to start, but it doesn't take into account the actual set where the launch tube epenings are square on.

Might I sugest that the tube stars off straight but then curves to a diagonal?

The problem is with the show that things rarely match, on the set it looks like the launch rail has guifers along it that match the the indentations on the belly of the Viper, while in the VFX sequence the viper is on a separate trolley that runs on top of the rail.

How long is the launch tube anyway?

good question .... I will look at that based on the models I have... I think Punisher has done some work on this in the past.

Titon · February 28th, 2011, 12:26 PM

Believe me building this thing in cg has given me a whole new perspective. Nothing fit's. And the stuff that does fit barely fit's.

I was able to make the launch tubes somewhat fit into my cg model and make it flow but i can't tell you what exactly the length of them. Like i said it sucks trying to incorporate the real world model minatures within the model itself.

Oye!

gmd3d · February 28th, 2011, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titon

Believe me building this thing in cg has given me a whole new perspective. Nothing fit's. And the stuff that does fit barely fit's.

I was able to make the launch tubes somewhat fit into my cg model and make it flow but i can't tell you what exactly the length of them. Like i said it sucks trying to incorporate the real world model minatures within the model itself.

Oye!

yeah looking at the one I using, at 6080ft long ..the tube could be between 130 / 140 ft long at an angle that it appears to be.

also

30ft above the landing deck .... I will show this tomorrow.

But it is a pain to fit all the visual info to the design.

Its my intention to build my own Battlestar (after the Technical manual) and design it so things do fit..

Punisher454 · February 28th, 2011, 01:08 PM

I have a mostly complete layout for the landing bay pods that all fits together.
The full size filming set for the launching bays were inclined at about 22 degrees towards the bow.
The only real concession I have had to make with my design is that the tubes themselves are shorter than the ones depicted in the show.
I'll post some stuff on this soon, I'm doing a bit of tweaking of it right now.
All the hangers, elevator shafts and such are just empty rooms, but the layout is workable.

gmd3d · February 28th, 2011, 01:25 PM

this is a rough estimate.

I think it now could be between 120ft long perhaps more ?

gmd3d · February 28th, 2011, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punisher454

I have a mostly complete layout for the landing bay pods that all fits together.
The full size filming set for the launching bays were inclined at about 22 degrees towards the bow.
The only real concession I have had to make with my design is that the tubes themselves are shorter than the ones depicted in the show.
I'll post some stuff on this soon, I'm doing a bit of tweaking of it right now.
All the hangers, elevator shafts and such are just empty rooms, but the layout is workable.

that for sure about the tubes been shorter then the ones depicted in the show,

perhaps put down to dramatic effect. ?

Punisher454 · February 28th, 2011, 02:03 PM

Yes thats about the launch tube length I have. The main difference is the inclination towards the bow of the ship. If we follow the filming miniature the launchbays angle at about 45 degrees forwards. The live action set was around 22 degrees forward.

I tried building a launching bay section at 45 degrees and it looked terrible. Very little resemblance to the set which receives so much on screen time. The launchtube exits on the other hand are never shown very close up and get a very small percentage of on-screen time, furthermore the angular change does not look that much different on the exterior model.
Also the 45 degree angled tubes dont work out to be much longer than the shorter tubes.

Punisher454 · February 28th, 2011, 02:47 PM

About launchtube length,
Seriously, they were too long in the show. A modern aircraft carrier launches heavy aircraft with relatively short catapults (The newest US carrier has an electromagnetic cat instead of steam).
I'm sure colonial catapult technology could launch a little viper with a 120 foot catapult.

gmd3d · February 28th, 2011, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punisher454

About launchtube length,
Seriously, they were too long in the show. A modern aircraft carrier launches heavy aircraft with relatively short catapults (The newest US carrier has an electromagnetic cat instead of steam).
I'm sure colonial catapult technology could launch a little viper with a 120 foot catapult.

yeah my thinking too. we can look at that further along perhaps a animated test to see.

this is where the fun begins

Punisher454 · February 28th, 2011, 03:17 PM

My landingbay stuff is all broken down into individual seperate models at the moment (I had to do this due to the way the Crysis model importer works) But I'll get it re-assembled so you can make measurements and such. will take a few days probably.

CBSG4ever · February 28th, 2011, 10:59 PM

Hello All,
I just had a screwball thought concerning the height difference of the landing bay entrance to the level of the launch tubes. Perhaps the solution is staring us right in the face? As I am not a modeler, I'm wondering if this would work. Please bare with me and allow me to explain.

A little background if I may.
I am somewhat a student of history. I do enjoy studying history quite a bit. Military history has been a particular interest to me, specifically WW2.
When the Imperial Japanese Navy designed and built their early aircraft carriers, they designed them so the deck sloped down towards the bow and stern from the middle of the ship. (picture, from the side if you will, a very flat pyramid)
Planes taking off would be rolling slightly "downhill" thus helping them gain speed for takeoff.
Conversely, a plane landing on the deck would be moving "uphill" thus helping them slow down.

So, my silly question to everyone here is: Could the Colonies have designed the landing deck entrance to ramp slightly "uphill" to help aid viper pilots in slowing down upon landing? Could this explain the height difference that seems to be such a discrepancy?

Modeling question: Would the side angle from the landing deck entrance threshold to where the launch tube level is, be too extreme to implement in reality?
Again, just a silly thought I had.

Punisher454 · March 1st, 2011, 12:00 AM

Its a really large change in elevation. The solution is already hinted at by the original film set. Behind each viper is an elevator, you can see the rollup doors behind each viper.
My version of the layout has the elevator shaft going down to the landing deck, and also up to the hanger level. The elevator has three stops, landing bay, launching bay and hanger deck.

And the studio set didnt have the launching bays "head on" they are all inclined towards the bow. The blueprints show this as does my launching bay model, which I'll do some CRUDE renderings of very soon.

Punisher454 · March 1st, 2011, 12:57 AM

Perhaps this may help illustrate the relationship between the landing bay, launching bays and viper elevator.
This is basically to scale with an assumed Galactica length of 6080 feet ( G-6080 ).
The landing bay model is the Taranis version adjusted to fit the landing bay opening.
The outer skin of the ships hull is shown in dark green.
I dont recall who's viper model is being used (sorry).
The launch bay is drawn already inclined towards the bow, this is BTW an isometric image with no depth perspective being applied.

This is my old version from around 2009, the current model is more refined.

gmd3d · March 1st, 2011, 01:20 AM

that's interesting. one of my designs from years ago I had some viper storage areas above the landing bay too. but I went in favor with having the hangers below the deck, (long before the new show came out bty

)

this is an area well will be looking at too.... nice work Punisher

Punisher454 · March 1st, 2011, 02:14 AM

A few more.

Shown is the launch bay and launch tube with the elevator shaft behind it. At the top and bottom of the elevator shaft are the doorways to the landing bay deck and the upper hanger.
My current layout stores the shuttles on the same level as the landing bay, but in the forward half of the "pod" with a compartment in between that has an elevator that can transport ships and large bulk cargo up a little higher than the launching bays to the large passageway that runs laterally across the ship connecting both landing bay sections to the central cargo bay.