In the Back of the Age of Rebellion book there is a Wonderful mini Adventure about a Large Heavy Freighter Called a Temple Class

Holds 3 Containers that can Generally carry 90,000 Tons a Piece. I realize the Ship has No guns standard but if you were to use its Customization to arm it up with a decent amount armor and anti Fighter and use the Cargo for Fighter Space. it should have Room. From what i can Gather the Cargo containers Mag Lock onto the hull and Open Up on the side to allow the loading and unloading of freight... i would think with a minor amount of work you could turn this into a Surprise Carrier to launch Raids from.

is this Generally Frowned upon or would a Large Freighter with So much Storage space to be converted into a Hangar.

My Group is just Wondering cause they want to Run a Primarily Star Fighter Group and a Sneaky Carrier to Rearm and Refit would be useful .

Also i cant seem to find the weight limits on some fighters and cant seem to find any. Well Thoughts ?

Well its mentioned in the essential guide to Warfare and some places in the EU that converting large freighters into improvised carriers isn't uncommon. You see a few examples in the X-Wing novels. There are currently no rules for converting cargo space to other purposes but I'm hoping the tech book will change that.

There is an attachment in the book called "Retrofitted Hanger Bay" that does exactly that. (at least in EotE)

I know there is that.. But it takes Very Valuable Customization Slots which the ship has only 6 of and it has no armaments. but with over 90,000 Tons of cargo in Each container and it has 3 of these things i was seeing if anyone had any home made rules for conversion of tonnage of cargo space to hangar room. i would think that much room would be at least enough room to house a few fighters and the equipment to outfit and upkeep them. is all

I know there is that.. But it takes Very Valuable Customization Slots which the ship has only 6 of and it has no armaments. but with over 90,000 Tons of cargo in Each container and it has 3 of these things i was seeing if anyone had any home made rules for conversion of tonnage of cargo space to hangar room. i would think that much room would be at least enough room to house a few fighters and the equipment to outfit and upkeep them. is all

Yeah no need to house rule, that's the attachment.

If you want to carry fighters without expending a hard point, use the clamps they all have these days.

I know there is that.. But it takes Very Valuable Customization Slots which the ship has only 6 of and it has no armaments. but with over 90,000 Tons of cargo in Each container and it has 3 of these things i was seeing if anyone had any home made rules for conversion of tonnage of cargo space to hangar room. i would think that much room would be at least enough room to house a few fighters and the equipment to outfit and upkeep them. is all

Also, the retrofit hanger attachment is more than just saying you can carry "x" amount of fighters, it includes the atmospheric doors and the wiring to control everything else associated with the hanger and probably for conversions than I can think of to make hanger operations in space safer.

As far as hand waving use of the cargo containers that are not retrofitted you have the issue of not being able to have continuous ops going on in there when you launch. It would be more like pilots go to fighters, secure the hanger, equalize atmosphere, open doors, launch fighters, secure hanger, and then the opposite when recovering the fighters. A retrofit prevents those extra steps and makes it more like what you would want. So IMO, you can launch the fighters out of the cargo area it just won't be as streamlined as say a ship retrofitted to said operation or a frigate that is made to do that.

I know there is that.. But it takes Very Valuable Customization Slots which the ship has only 6 of and it has no armaments. but with over 90,000 Tons of cargo in Each container and it has 3 of these things i was seeing if anyone had any home made rules for conversion of tonnage of cargo space to hangar room. i would think that much room would be at least enough room to house a few fighters and the equipment to outfit and upkeep them. is all

Yeah no need to house rule, that's the attachment.

If you want to carry fighters without expending a hard point, use the clamps they all have these days.

The clamps wouldn't be an attachment that takes a hard point?

Osprey: Check out sidebar on page 258 EotE CRB.

Varan: Check out my catalogue of shinies for some house-rules, not exactly what you're looking for perhaps, but it's worth considering that there's a reason starships have limited customisation hard points and that adding a hangar takes up CHPs. Even if there's a 90,000 ton cargo space you still need power, magnetic fields, fuel lines, stuff and maintenance to add a hangar bay. CHPs represent both the physical space and needs, but also power and energy that the ship has in store for extra stuff added to its systems. Using the house rules in the catalogue I linked to above you should also consider decreasing not just cargo space, but also system strain threshold, at a 1 for 1 basis at the very least.

I know there is that.. But it takes Very Valuable Customization Slots which the ship has only 6 of and it has no armaments. but with over 90,000 Tons of cargo in Each container and it has 3 of these things i was seeing if anyone had any home made rules for conversion of tonnage of cargo space to hangar room. i would think that much room would be at least enough room to house a few fighters and the equipment to outfit and upkeep them. is all

Yeah no need to house rule, that's the attachment.

If you want to carry fighters without expending a hard point, use the clamps they all have these days.

The clamps wouldn't be an attachment that takes a hard point?

EotE 258, box next to the z-95 illustration. All freighters can have docking clamps they can use to haul a fighter or two around. Now standard equipment so a player group that wants a couple of fighters doesn't have to bend over backwards for the logistics to work. Convenient since it also means craft like the Ghost and Phantom don't need anything fancy.

Of course the citadel is actually called out as having them, and is a good ship to boot. In case your gm is a canon Nazi.

Since each cargo bay is removable, treat each one as a vehicle with its own hardpoints. Your choice if you load with guns or starfighters.

Although as a GM I would be tempted to just hand wave the whole deal, and make a stat block to fit. I would assume each pod would be large enough to hold at least 4, possibly up to 12 fighters, depending on launch systems, maintenance ability, customization, etc. For example a large open bay would hold 4 (or maybe 1 sil 4 freighter), and would allow full maintenance and repairs. A multi-level launch/recovery bay, with repair capability with penalties might hold 8 fighters. A dedicated setup, specific to certain fighters (i.e. Y-wings only) might hold 12 fighters, with no repair capability, only rearming and refueling (specific ships because you are using launch tubes sized for specific craft).

Just curious, how exactly does the extra upgrades on the Hangar Refit mod work?

It says there's up to 5 more upgrade capacity mods. So the Hangar on a Sil5 ship, if maxed out (5 upgrades) gives a total of 10 Silhouette worth of space? If so that's awesome. But how about for larger vessels, like Sil7 and up? +1 capacity seems rather small.

Yes modding a retrofitted hanger on a Sil 7 sized craft is kinda a waste unless you really need those 5 extra Sil.

Remember that's the Attachment, and at Sil 7 it can already carry 20 starfighters without modding it. Part of the idea I think is at Sil 7, if you need to carry a lot of starfighters, you are stretching the limits of what you can do with an aftermarket kit and really should either buy a second kit or just buy a ship that was built to be a carrier in the first place.

Technically, you can't mount a second copy of any attachment aside from weapons, so you can't put two hangars on there even if you have the hard points.

Mmm, better not to risk the mod failure on Sil7+ vessels eh?

Sorry for necro-ing this thread, but I'm actually interested in this.

I had a similar idea for my game with the freighter. I think the original op poses a decent question as the details of the craft explain that not only are the cargo modules separate and can be swapped from cargo to passangers to whatever, but also that each cargo module has it's own independent life support system and power (but no locomotion) so they can be detached and moved around without risking the contents.

I *think* that the best way to do this would be to assume that yeah, each of the 3 cargo modules is a separate "vehicle" with it's own hard points, though as a GM I'm tempted to limit it to just 1 HP per module. There's also the question of the silhouette. The freighter is SIL 6, but would the modules also be SIL 6 or just SIL 5? At 90000 tons of capacity each, I'd happily give them 6 but it might be pushing it a bit.

The containers seem to be sil 4 or 5, but they certainly don't have extra space for fuel, generators big enough to power repair and maintenance equipment and starfighters.

Personally I would still require the 2 hardpoints for the needed supporting systems from the freighter, but allow the attachment to be integrated into the cargo containers and function as long as they are attached to a ship. The special bonus about this arrangement is that you can switch carrier ships for the attachment within minutes if the other freighter has the fitting systems installed as well. This includes using the containers has hangars for bases and space stations. Highly mobile, personal hangar which can be literally hidden if the need arises.

Now that freighter has 6 hardpoints … go figure what a glorious ship it can be

The containers seem to be sil 4 or 5, but they certainly don't have space for fuel, generators big enough to power repair and maintenance equipment and starfighters.

Personally I would still require the 2 hardpoints for the needed supporting systems from the freighter, but allow the attachment to be integrated into the cargo containers and function as long as they are attached to a ship. The special bonus about this arrangement is that you can switch carrier ships for the attachment within minutes if the other freighter has the fitting systems installed as well. This includes using the containers has hangars for bases and space stations. Highly mobile, personal hangar which can be literally hidden if the need arises.

Now that freighter has 6 hardpoints … go figure what a glorious ship it can be

This is the key point. Being able to carry a container full of X-Wings is one thing. Being able to operate those X-Wings as a strike force is something else entirely. You need large airtight doors (if your hangar's going to operate like an airlock) or specialist shield (if it's going to act more like the standard hangars we see) for your fighters to get in and out. You need fuel stores for the fighters, and the equipment to get that fuel into the fighters. You need secure magazines for proton torpedoes. You need maintenance bays to keep the fighters flying. You need storage for spare parts. You need bunk space for the pilots and ground crews. A container full of X-Wings isn't an air group, it's cargo.

The Temple class is an abomination. It's literally just an upside-down Nebulon B frigate. I mean, if they had just said it's a Nebulon B frigate with cargo pods slung under the spar I'd be like "Well, that actually makes more sense than a Nebulon B frigate that doesn't use all that space for anything", but flipping it upside down... urgh.

I don't think I have an actual point to make, I just hate the Temple class ship.

I reflipped the temple class and described it as a nebulon-b variant for carrying large amounts of cargo. And gave it some laser cannons for basic defense. Even hauling cargo, there's no reason for that ship to not have some small weapons.

I reflipped the temple class and described it as a nebulon-b variant for carrying large amounts of cargo. And gave it some laser cannons for basic defense. Even hauling cargo, there's no reason for that ship to not have some small weapons.

With 6 hardpoints that ship is meant to be armed on the aftermarket

Sorry for necro-ing this thread, but I'm actually interested in this.

I had a similar idea for my game with the freighter. I think the original op poses a decent question as the details of the craft explain that not only are the cargo modules separate and can be swapped from cargo to passangers to whatever, but also that each cargo module has it's own independent life support system and power (but no locomotion) so they can be detached and moved around without risking the contents.

I *think* that the best way to do this would be to assume that yeah, each of the 3 cargo modules is a separate "vehicle" with it's own hard points, though as a GM I'm tempted to limit it to just 1 HP per module. There's also the question of the silhouette. The freighter is SIL 6, but would the modules also be SIL 6 or just SIL 5? At 90000 tons of capacity each, I'd happily give them 6 but it might be pushing it a bit.

Derpitude of the Temple Class aside, I think you're missing the point of both the "Retrofitted Hanger Bay" attachment and the HP system.

The retrofitted hanger bay is there to allow a ship not intended by the original manufacturer to have a hanger, to have one anyway. This is why you can't deconstruct a lot of the carriers int eh book. They were built as carriers from the keel up. So they don't use the retrofitted hanger bay attachment to carry smaller craft, they use the original manufacturer hanger bay that was an organic part of the original design.

The HP system is there to show how much flexibility a vehicle has in relation to pushing it's systems beyond the original design. Some vehicle are build with extra strong frames, oversized engines or component compartments, and high end power plants so as to accept aftermarket add-ons. Other are built to do what the designer intended and nothing more.

So, in relation to the temple class, giving the modular and replaceable cargo pods HP is kinda silly. They are each built to do what they are built to do.

That said, it's not a stretch in the least to instead just make a hanger bay module that carries however many craft make sense for a box that size to mount.

I think you're onto something... the stats of the ship do *not* include whatever extras it gets from the modules, so I think the right way to do it is the 6HP + whatever the extra modules give.