 June 2, 2009 - 12:44pm | Ok, gravity is free but what about the lights? As stated in another thread I'm not a fan of the AD rules for generators so... I'm proposing atomic reactors for space stations. To keep things simple enough to KISS: they're the similar (not the same obviously) to the atomic engines of star ships. and ship engineers are qualified to operate them. A space station requires a minimum number of reactors equal to its station size divided by 2 rounded down (minimum of 1) and they are spaced equi-distant within the hull in case of the need to jettison (same self destruct rules apply as per KHs). Stations sizes 1&2 require type A, sizes 3&4 require type B and sizes 5&6 require type type A. In cases where the station's builders desire redundancy the station may have a maximum # of reactors equal to its size number. They cost the same as atomic drives of the same size built at a type 1 construction center and have the same computer program requirements though its called a reactor program instead of a drive program. One fuel pellet is good for 1 year. Maintenance is on going so overhauls take 1/2 the time as for ships and generally only one reactor is taken down for overhaul. In the case of stations with only 1 reactor overhauls are planned ahead to ensure sufficient battery support and engineering personnel to prevent complications. There are fail-safes for reactor shut down and for jettisoning of overloading reactors. It takes one KH game turn to jettison the armored bulkhead beneath the reactor and for the explosive bolts to fire ejecting the reactor core/room from the station. The reactor will drift away from the station in a manner similar to jettisoned engines. The newer reactors cost +10% and have a rocket booster and guidence system to ensure it jettisons and moves away from the inhabited planet the station is orbiting. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
