Spinward Scout
October 5th, 2004, 11:02 PM
Greetings Gentlebeings,
I've had an odd thought on my mind lately. When I look at a map of Charted Space, I keep looking at the Great Rift, specifically Reft Sector. At about 4 subsectors wide, it's maybe 30 or 40 hexes across. I keep thinking of a way to cross this and set things up to continue to cross the distance. I'm also thinking about how to do it where Jump-1 ships can cross it too. Now all I can come up with is to have a series of tankers set up across Reft Sector.
But how to go about getting them there. :confused:
I'm looking at the 5000 ton Hercules Heavy Merchant from The Traveller Adventure to do this. 510 tons fuel, and 2911 tons cargo. It also talks about how you can put up to 3 500-ton demountable fuel tanks in the cargo hold of the ship. But how many ships would it take? Surely less than 100. Or should I just Jump into the first empty hex with my Tanker and form an Empty Space Fueling Station (ESFS) and have a giant tank (I'd say 10,000 or 20,000 tons) towed nearby or built near the tanker. Ship in unrefined fuel and build a refinery next to the tank. And then when I have that established, start another in the next system?
How would you go about this?
Scout
I've had an odd thought on my mind lately. When I look at a map of Charted Space, I keep looking at the Great Rift, specifically Reft Sector. At about 4 subsectors wide, it's maybe 30 or 40 hexes across. I keep thinking of a way to cross this and set things up to continue to cross the distance. I'm also thinking about how to do it where Jump-1 ships can cross it too. Now all I can come up with is to have a series of tankers set up across Reft Sector.
But how to go about getting them there. :confused:
I'm looking at the 5000 ton Hercules Heavy Merchant from The Traveller Adventure to do this. 510 tons fuel, and 2911 tons cargo. It also talks about how you can put up to 3 500-ton demountable fuel tanks in the cargo hold of the ship. But how many ships would it take? Surely less than 100. Or should I just Jump into the first empty hex with my Tanker and form an Empty Space Fueling Station (ESFS) and have a giant tank (I'd say 10,000 or 20,000 tons) towed nearby or built near the tanker. Ship in unrefined fuel and build a refinery next to the tank. And then when I have that established, start another in the next system?
How would you go about this?
Scout
Malenfant
October 6th, 2004, 02:12 AM
Realistically speaking, those empty hexes aren't empty - they're full of rogue planets, subgiants, and brown dwarfs and probably M V stars too. So if you can detect and find those then you can use those to build refueling bases. If you're looking at a rogue jovian (but not a brown dwarf) then you've got a fuel source right there. I've written a couple of articles on these worlds in JTAS if you subscribe to that...
aramis
October 6th, 2004, 02:12 AM
Well, assuming MT or TNE rules, one can make a 3J3 (60% fuel) design. For CT, T4, and T20, assume a 3J2 design, and substitute for it.
Process, on each step, 2 leave
Arrive at a point. All three have 2j3 remaining.
Ship 1 loads back to 3J3, and ship 2 to 1J3; 1 jumps on, 2 jumps back, resulting in:
Ship one has 2J3, and ship 2 has 0J3 and a refuel.
You can scale this as far as you want. Divide the distance by the J#, subtract 1, and then raise 2 to that power, and 3Jx can cross any distance IF YOU ALLOW EMPTY HEX JUMPS. Many Refs don't.
So, crossing that distance of 30 parsecs with 3J2 needs 2^14 ships... crossing it with J3 needs 2^9 ships.
In CT, you can, just barely, make a 2J4 ship. so an 8 hex is merely hard to cross. anything greater is not doable without drop tanks or massive refuel flotillas. Or finding dark objects in empty hexes and stripping them of fuel.
Under MT, you can get 3J4 or 2J6 performance on specialized couriers. 2J6 can croiss the canon rifts by the various small isolated worlds. The Islands cluster is only J8 at closest point for a through route.
That 3J4 can cross the 30 hex "True Void" with only 2^7 ships.
Process, on each step, 2 leave
Arrive at a point. All three have 2j3 remaining.
Ship 1 loads back to 3J3, and ship 2 to 1J3; 1 jumps on, 2 jumps back, resulting in:
Ship one has 2J3, and ship 2 has 0J3 and a refuel.
You can scale this as far as you want. Divide the distance by the J#, subtract 1, and then raise 2 to that power, and 3Jx can cross any distance IF YOU ALLOW EMPTY HEX JUMPS. Many Refs don't.
So, crossing that distance of 30 parsecs with 3J2 needs 2^14 ships... crossing it with J3 needs 2^9 ships.
In CT, you can, just barely, make a 2J4 ship. so an 8 hex is merely hard to cross. anything greater is not doable without drop tanks or massive refuel flotillas. Or finding dark objects in empty hexes and stripping them of fuel.
Under MT, you can get 3J4 or 2J6 performance on specialized couriers. 2J6 can croiss the canon rifts by the various small isolated worlds. The Islands cluster is only J8 at closest point for a through route.
That 3J4 can cross the 30 hex "True Void" with only 2^7 ships.
rancke
October 6th, 2004, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by Malenfant:
Realistically speaking, those empty hexes aren't empty - they're full of rogue planets, subgiants, and brown dwarfs and probably M V stars too. That's the real universe you're talking about. It is abundantly clear from the background that the Traveller Universe differs from the Real Universe in this respect. The empty hexes are either almost devoid of dark worlds and brown dwarfs or they are as plentiful as you say but so difficult to spot that in over a millenium no one has found it practical to find enough of them to set up a route across the Great Rift. Take your pick. Yes, both options are implausible. As I said, take your pick. But 'Plentiful and as detectable as they would be in Real Life' is not an option. It would ruin too much of the background.
The Traveller Universe may resemble the real universe on most points, but never lose sight of the fact that it is not identical to it.
Hans
PS. I don't really feel that I should have to mention this, but experience tells me that I'm wrong: What I said above is 1) an opinion and 2) only applies to the Official Traveller Universe. If you want it in YTU and somehow feel you ned my blessing, you have it.
Realistically speaking, those empty hexes aren't empty - they're full of rogue planets, subgiants, and brown dwarfs and probably M V stars too. That's the real universe you're talking about. It is abundantly clear from the background that the Traveller Universe differs from the Real Universe in this respect. The empty hexes are either almost devoid of dark worlds and brown dwarfs or they are as plentiful as you say but so difficult to spot that in over a millenium no one has found it practical to find enough of them to set up a route across the Great Rift. Take your pick. Yes, both options are implausible. As I said, take your pick. But 'Plentiful and as detectable as they would be in Real Life' is not an option. It would ruin too much of the background.
The Traveller Universe may resemble the real universe on most points, but never lose sight of the fact that it is not identical to it.
Hans
PS. I don't really feel that I should have to mention this, but experience tells me that I'm wrong: What I said above is 1) an opinion and 2) only applies to the Official Traveller Universe. If you want it in YTU and somehow feel you ned my blessing, you have it.
Malenfant
October 6th, 2004, 12:01 PM
This is where I grumble about how JTAS articles in print get "canonised" but JTAS Online articles don't ;)
mike wightman
October 6th, 2004, 01:11 PM
A lot of the stuff in the printed JTAS was variant rather than canon.
The online JTAS has two problems being canonized:
1. if it ain't in print, it ain't canon (some would argue that if you can't find it written on vellum in crayon by MWM's fair hand it isn't canon either ;) graemlins/file_23.gif );
2. GT isn't authorised canon for the OTU, only for the alternative universe/variant the is the GTU :D tongue.gif , and most people consider online JTAS to be GTU only ;)
The online JTAS has two problems being canonized:
1. if it ain't in print, it ain't canon (some would argue that if you can't find it written on vellum in crayon by MWM's fair hand it isn't canon either ;) graemlins/file_23.gif );
2. GT isn't authorised canon for the OTU, only for the alternative universe/variant the is the GTU :D tongue.gif , and most people consider online JTAS to be GTU only ;)
aramis
October 6th, 2004, 08:56 PM
One side note: it is implied STRONGLY in The Traveller Adventure that empty hexes can be jumped to; part of the adventure revolves around finding demountables to cross a gap.
Likewise, it can also be inferred those rifts lack the density of the "dim matter" in the same manner that they lack bright matter; hence in Atlas of the Imperium, the lack of numbers in the hexes.
Likewise, it can also be inferred those rifts lack the density of the "dim matter" in the same manner that they lack bright matter; hence in Atlas of the Imperium, the lack of numbers in the hexes.
Malenfant
October 6th, 2004, 09:05 PM
well we know that the OTU astrography isn't like the real universe anyway because the rifts don't exist in reality - there are no areas in reality anywhere near us that have a total lack of stars or other objects.
lightsenshi
October 6th, 2004, 09:19 PM
(there is the minor detail of finding out these little things for those of us who only have the t20 book) smile.gif
daryen
October 6th, 2004, 10:48 PM
The Traveller Adventure did not imply that you could jump into an empty hex. It flatly states it. No only do the adventurers acquire demountable fuel tanks to cross a J2 gap with a double jump, but one of the adventures involves the hijacking of a Tukera calibration point in an empty hex.
There is no implication; it is canon fact.
Also, we do have at least one canon reference to the idea that empty hexes don't have to be empty: the secret Darrian base. The base is built on a rogue comet in an "empty" hex.
Finally, the nature of all of those Regency calibration points was never fully explained ...
There is no implication; it is canon fact.
Also, we do have at least one canon reference to the idea that empty hexes don't have to be empty: the secret Darrian base. The base is built on a rogue comet in an "empty" hex.
Finally, the nature of all of those Regency calibration points was never fully explained ...
Malenfant
October 6th, 2004, 10:56 PM
It does seem that empty hexes are only empty as long as canon suits it ;) .
I mean, we've got Deep Space refuelling stations in the empty hexes in the Scout Cruiser EA, the recalibration points in the RS, and I think there's one somewhere in the Sword Worlds subsector too...
They don't appear to be a real barrier to exploration if a group is prepared to make some effort to find things in them to build their bases on (or build ones from scratch). ;) graemlins/file_23.gif
I mean, we've got Deep Space refuelling stations in the empty hexes in the Scout Cruiser EA, the recalibration points in the RS, and I think there's one somewhere in the Sword Worlds subsector too...
They don't appear to be a real barrier to exploration if a group is prepared to make some effort to find things in them to build their bases on (or build ones from scratch). ;) graemlins/file_23.gif
SlightlyLyons
October 6th, 2004, 11:00 PM
Well, in reality it would hardly mater if the rift was "empty" there would be enough stray hidrogen in deep space to ba captured and used to fuel a ship, it would just take a long time.
Malenfant
October 6th, 2004, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by SlightlyLyons:
Well, in reality it would hardly mater if the rift was "empty" there would be enough stray hidrogen in deep space to ba captured and used to fuel a ship, it would just take a long time. Too long to be remotely practical (unless you had Bussard Ramjet ships travelling at significant fractions of the speed of light)
Well, in reality it would hardly mater if the rift was "empty" there would be enough stray hidrogen in deep space to ba captured and used to fuel a ship, it would just take a long time. Too long to be remotely practical (unless you had Bussard Ramjet ships travelling at significant fractions of the speed of light)
BetterThanLife
October 7th, 2004, 12:51 AM
Since mass goes up as speed increases as you approach c it is uncertain that you could ever generate enought thrust to mass ratio to attain or maintain enough velocity to make a ram scoop work. (The concept is too much like a perpetual motion machine as it is.) I am aware that regular air breathing Ram Jets have been tested and work but they still require fuel. With the Bussard RamJet you don't even need fuel once you get to velocity. (At least in theory.) I think the H-Bomb engine has more promise. (The ship rides the shockwave or energy of the blast, usually using multiple bombs ejected behind the craft for accelleration but the radiation and EMP would cause other problems. smile.gif )
Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SlightlyLyons:
Well, in reality it would hardly mater if the rift was "empty" there would be enough stray hidrogen in deep space to ba captured and used to fuel a ship, it would just take a long time. Too long to be remotely practical (unless you had Bussard Ramjet ships travelling at significant fractions of the speed of light) </font>[/QUOTE]
Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SlightlyLyons:
Well, in reality it would hardly mater if the rift was "empty" there would be enough stray hidrogen in deep space to ba captured and used to fuel a ship, it would just take a long time. Too long to be remotely practical (unless you had Bussard Ramjet ships travelling at significant fractions of the speed of light) </font>[/QUOTE]
Malenfant
October 7th, 2004, 01:04 AM
Well, I wasn't saying anything about the veracity of the Bussard Ramjet concept ;) . I think the concept was to get up to a sizable fraction of lightspeed by conventional thrusters, then turn on the "hydrogen ramscoop" which makes a very large magnetic field (much larger than the physical ram itself) that pulls in hydrogen atoms in the interstellar medium to power the drive. Or something.
Of course, since Traveller is based on 70s and earlier scifi concepts, maybe it can somehow work in the OTU ;) graemlins/file_23.gif .
My favourite from those old designs was the Daedalus probe (http://homepage.mac.com/joebergeron/daedalus.html) - to quote from the summary at http://sfwrg.org/d001.html
The Daedalus project was a study by the British Interplanetary Society in the early 1970s into the feasibility of an unmanned interstellar mission to Barnards Star. One of the requirements was that the probe should use current technology, or technology which was likely to be available in the near future. The propulsion system was based on that developed by the US in the 1960s for the Orion project. However, where the Orion project used nuclear fission, Daedalus was designed to use nuclear fusion. Small pellets of helium-3 and deuterium would be bombarded by electron beams from emitters mounted round the edge of the pusher plate, and would explode, the resulting plasma providing thrust. The propulsion system was dsigned to fire 250 pellets a second for four years to reach a cruising speed of 12% of the speed of light, or about 36,000 kilometers per second. The spacecraft was designed as having two stages, each powered by the same thermo-nuclear pulse engine giving a specific impulse of about a million seconds. The first stage would be dropped after two years acceleration at about 7% of the speed of light, the second stage completing the acceleration phase.
The launch mass would be approximately 54,000 tons, of which 450 tons was the scientific payload, and 50,000 tons fuel. Protection from interstellar dust was provided by a beryllium disk in front of the payload bay, and by an artificially generated dust cloud some 200 km in front of the probe as it entered the denser regions close to the target system. The Daedalus probe carried sub-probes which would be released up to seven years before fly-by, each fitted with nuclear powered ion propulsion systems.
And on top of this, it looked dead cool :D
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/B/BarnardsStar.html
http://www.aemann.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/spacecraft/daedalus/daedalus.html
IIRC there were rules in FF&S for all of these propulsion systems...
Er, we now return you to your regularly scheduled topic smile.gif
Of course, since Traveller is based on 70s and earlier scifi concepts, maybe it can somehow work in the OTU ;) graemlins/file_23.gif .
My favourite from those old designs was the Daedalus probe (http://homepage.mac.com/joebergeron/daedalus.html) - to quote from the summary at http://sfwrg.org/d001.html
The Daedalus project was a study by the British Interplanetary Society in the early 1970s into the feasibility of an unmanned interstellar mission to Barnards Star. One of the requirements was that the probe should use current technology, or technology which was likely to be available in the near future. The propulsion system was based on that developed by the US in the 1960s for the Orion project. However, where the Orion project used nuclear fission, Daedalus was designed to use nuclear fusion. Small pellets of helium-3 and deuterium would be bombarded by electron beams from emitters mounted round the edge of the pusher plate, and would explode, the resulting plasma providing thrust. The propulsion system was dsigned to fire 250 pellets a second for four years to reach a cruising speed of 12% of the speed of light, or about 36,000 kilometers per second. The spacecraft was designed as having two stages, each powered by the same thermo-nuclear pulse engine giving a specific impulse of about a million seconds. The first stage would be dropped after two years acceleration at about 7% of the speed of light, the second stage completing the acceleration phase.
The launch mass would be approximately 54,000 tons, of which 450 tons was the scientific payload, and 50,000 tons fuel. Protection from interstellar dust was provided by a beryllium disk in front of the payload bay, and by an artificially generated dust cloud some 200 km in front of the probe as it entered the denser regions close to the target system. The Daedalus probe carried sub-probes which would be released up to seven years before fly-by, each fitted with nuclear powered ion propulsion systems.
And on top of this, it looked dead cool :D
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/B/BarnardsStar.html
http://www.aemann.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/spacecraft/daedalus/daedalus.html
IIRC there were rules in FF&S for all of these propulsion systems...
Er, we now return you to your regularly scheduled topic smile.gif
spank
October 7th, 2004, 08:08 AM
It really depends on where you want to cross to and from. If you just want to cross from Tobia to Cyril the furthest gap you have to cross is about 9 hexs. It also depends on what jump feul consumption rules you want to uses, CT is a flat 10% per hex for feul, TNE is jump drive size * 5 / max jump number, for a jump-6 ship this works out to 5.8% displacement per hex.
BetterThanLife
October 7th, 2004, 11:13 AM
So for a CT design, and coincidentally for a T20 design you would need 90% of your displacement to be fuel. (Like that is possible.) Actually with huge droptanks, about 60% of your hull, dropped to make a jump 4-5 for the first leg then the next leg on internal fuel, I suppose it would be possible but excessively expensive. And you would be carrying about a J6 Engine just to keep the thing moving without dropping the tanks.
Interesting, back to the drawing boards. Naval Rift Courier coming up. smile.gif
In MT a Jump 5 drive is about 6% of your hull and J5 fuel about 30%. So I guess you could manage it. But there is only 34% left to cram in all the other crap you are required to have in MT. That is of course if you want to make 2 jump 5s. smile.gif It would have to be a fairly large ship to take advantage of scale. (After all some things don't change size with the size of the ship.)
Originally posted by spank:
It really depends on where you want to cross to and from. If you just want to cross from Tobia to Cyril the furthest gap you have to cross is about 9 hexs. It also depends on what jump feul consumption rules you want to uses, CT is a flat 10% per hex for feul, TNE is jump drive size * 5 / max jump number, for a jump-6 ship this works out to 5.8% displacement per hex.
Interesting, back to the drawing boards. Naval Rift Courier coming up. smile.gif
In MT a Jump 5 drive is about 6% of your hull and J5 fuel about 30%. So I guess you could manage it. But there is only 34% left to cram in all the other crap you are required to have in MT. That is of course if you want to make 2 jump 5s. smile.gif It would have to be a fairly large ship to take advantage of scale. (After all some things don't change size with the size of the ship.)
Originally posted by spank:
It really depends on where you want to cross to and from. If you just want to cross from Tobia to Cyril the furthest gap you have to cross is about 9 hexs. It also depends on what jump feul consumption rules you want to uses, CT is a flat 10% per hex for feul, TNE is jump drive size * 5 / max jump number, for a jump-6 ship this works out to 5.8% displacement per hex.
BetterThanLife
October 7th, 2004, 11:49 AM
How to cross a rift. Or how to cross parsecs of enemy held territory. (Same problem.)
Are there any Rifts in the OTU that don't have a place that can be crossed with no more than a 12 parsec gap?
Here it is thanks to Andrew Moffett for his excellent High Guard Shipyard.
Ship: Hawkwing
Class: Hawkwing
Type: Rift Courier
Architect: Bruce Hoins
Tech Level: 15
USP
FC-A1626F2-040000-50000-0 MCr 735.210 1 KTons
Bat Bear 4 3 Crew: 24
Bat 4 3 TL: 15
Cargo: 30.000 Fuel: 660.000 EP: 60.000 Agility: 2 Shipboard Security Detail: 1
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification
Architects Fee: MCr 7.352 Cost in Quantity: MCr 588.168
Detailed Description
HULL
1,000.000 tons standard, 14,000.000 cubic meters, Needle/Wedge Configuration
CREW
10 Officers, 14 Ratings
ENGINEERING
Jump-6, 2G Manuever, Power plant-6, 60.000 EP, Agility 2
AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/6fib Computer
HARDPOINTS
10 Hardpoints
ARMAMENT
6 Triple Beam Laser Turrets organised into 3 Batteries (Factor-5)
DEFENCES
4 Triple Sandcaster Turrets organised into 4 Batteries (Factor-4)
CRAFT
None
FUEL
660.000 Tons Fuel (6 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant, 600.000 ton drop tanks
MISCELLANEOUS
19.0 Staterooms, 30.000 Tons Cargo
USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
None
COST
MCr 742.562 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 7.352), MCr 588.168 in Quantity
CONSTRUCTION TIME
120 Weeks Singly, 96 Weeks in Quantity
COMMENTS: The ship is only capable of 1G maneuver and Jump 3 with tanks retained. (Though it can make 2 jump 3s and one jump 1 without refueling in this configuration.)
If the start of the 12 hex trip, across a rift for example, is a Naval base then the tanks can be recovered, reconditioned, refueled and ready for the next trip, saving a fortune.)
If a midpoint is also a naval base the same applies.
Without tanks it is still a jump-6 2g courier.
Room for 5 passengers and 30 tons of Priority cargo. Means that the ship can be used to transfer Admirals to various parts of a command area and avoid high threat areas between start and end points. (But it would need a significant fleet presence, at either end, to ensure safety of the Courier.)
Are there any Rifts in the OTU that don't have a place that can be crossed with no more than a 12 parsec gap?
Here it is thanks to Andrew Moffett for his excellent High Guard Shipyard.
Ship: Hawkwing
Class: Hawkwing
Type: Rift Courier
Architect: Bruce Hoins
Tech Level: 15
USP
FC-A1626F2-040000-50000-0 MCr 735.210 1 KTons
Bat Bear 4 3 Crew: 24
Bat 4 3 TL: 15
Cargo: 30.000 Fuel: 660.000 EP: 60.000 Agility: 2 Shipboard Security Detail: 1
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification
Architects Fee: MCr 7.352 Cost in Quantity: MCr 588.168
Detailed Description
HULL
1,000.000 tons standard, 14,000.000 cubic meters, Needle/Wedge Configuration
CREW
10 Officers, 14 Ratings
ENGINEERING
Jump-6, 2G Manuever, Power plant-6, 60.000 EP, Agility 2
AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/6fib Computer
HARDPOINTS
10 Hardpoints
ARMAMENT
6 Triple Beam Laser Turrets organised into 3 Batteries (Factor-5)
DEFENCES
4 Triple Sandcaster Turrets organised into 4 Batteries (Factor-4)
CRAFT
None
FUEL
660.000 Tons Fuel (6 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant, 600.000 ton drop tanks
MISCELLANEOUS
19.0 Staterooms, 30.000 Tons Cargo
USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
None
COST
MCr 742.562 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 7.352), MCr 588.168 in Quantity
CONSTRUCTION TIME
120 Weeks Singly, 96 Weeks in Quantity
COMMENTS: The ship is only capable of 1G maneuver and Jump 3 with tanks retained. (Though it can make 2 jump 3s and one jump 1 without refueling in this configuration.)
If the start of the 12 hex trip, across a rift for example, is a Naval base then the tanks can be recovered, reconditioned, refueled and ready for the next trip, saving a fortune.)
If a midpoint is also a naval base the same applies.
Without tanks it is still a jump-6 2g courier.
Room for 5 passengers and 30 tons of Priority cargo. Means that the ship can be used to transfer Admirals to various parts of a command area and avoid high threat areas between start and end points. (But it would need a significant fleet presence, at either end, to ensure safety of the Courier.)
BetterThanLife
October 7th, 2004, 12:01 PM
Teh best thing about that design is you don't have to put expensive to maintain refuel points in the middle of a rift. You just put a naval base at either end, and if neccessary one in the middle. You could cross the rift in Corridor sector in 4 weeks and only stop for fuel at a place where there is fuel.
If you think about it, to supply a deepspace refueling point for couriers would require a second deep space refueling point. SO your fuel can be transported on Jump 3 ships. (WHich might actually have a useful load.) Using this Jump-6x2 ship you avoid the refuel point. And if you start and stop at naval bases you even save the cost of the expensive drop tanks.
If you think about it, to supply a deepspace refueling point for couriers would require a second deep space refueling point. SO your fuel can be transported on Jump 3 ships. (WHich might actually have a useful load.) Using this Jump-6x2 ship you avoid the refuel point. And if you start and stop at naval bases you even save the cost of the expensive drop tanks.
daibaka
October 7th, 2004, 03:07 PM
On the subject of Bussard Ramscoop ships in Traveller, there was the Contact: Hhkarr(?) article in Challenge that described the arrival of a bunch of territorial, chain smoking lizards that turned up at their previously abandoned home worlds and set about massacreing the Vargr that had moved in during the intervening millennia. They apparently had a natural facility with gauss technology and their original colony ships were described as having bussard ramscoop drives. They had migrated at STL speeds to and from someplace outside of Julian space.
Sorry for the OT intermission...
Sorry for the OT intermission...
aramis
October 7th, 2004, 09:15 PM
The TTA explicitly states you can jump to the empty hexes in those certain spots, and then puts a calibration point station at one of them (which would imply that, if one is willing to pay KCr 2.5 per Td, one could buy fuel there. (That extra KCr2 is for the shipping cost and deadhead leg on the fuel transport).
It doesn't say you can jump to all of them. (It just strongly implies that, by allowing it on all the empty hexes surrounding the spinward main.)
Not all Refs allow it. Not all refs have the big red book, either.
It doesn't say you can jump to all of them. (It just strongly implies that, by allowing it on all the empty hexes surrounding the spinward main.)
Not all Refs allow it. Not all refs have the big red book, either.
BetterThanLife
October 8th, 2004, 09:56 AM
Sup-7s description of demountable tanks implies it. It is mentioned in Adventure 4 as well. (I believe.) I have never seen a problem with jumping to an empty hex. The only problem is there is no fuel source to refuel with. But if you bring your own fuel... Now finding something in an empty hex without a stellar body to anchor it to, you better know where you are going. Hence the calibration points. They are mentioned in Rebellion SOurcebook, Gateway to Destiny, and 1248, so you don't need to have the Big Red BOok to use the concept.
One key point is that, because of bulk, it is extremely expensive to ship fuel. And putting a second jump point in is even more expensive. (About three to four times as expensive.) Remember a tanker has to get in and back out again. For a jump 2 refuel point it is only 40% of the ships volume to go there and come back out. For a Jump 3 point it is 60% and for a J4 point 80%. Keeping a Jump-4 or higher route open is going to actually require intervening jump points. (And a secret Jump-6 route is actually going to require, at a minimum it be a Jump-3 route.)
To give you an example, a Jump ship (Supp-9) would require 3000 tons of jump fuel (Its normal load) to carry 2000 T of Fuel into a jump-4 point, then it would require to refuel so it can make the jump 4 back out. (2000 T.) Ooops. smile.gif
For the higher corridors, your tanker is going to have to use Drop Tanks and have enough internal fuel to jump back out just to carry a semi useful load. (And it is going to have to be large.)
Equipping your ships with droptanks instead makes more economic sense. Especially if you are jumping from a freindly base so the tanks can be recovered and reused.
For Jump-2 and Jump-3 routes, you will need 3 tankers to supply the second point. One to actually make the delivery, one to provide enough fuel for the tanker to get to the second point and one to provide the fuel for it to get back.
(And we still haven't put all that much fuel at the first point.)
Economically Calibration points don't make much sense. Militarily they make tons of sense, but building a Rift Courier actually makes more sense. (More flexibility.) After all if the enemy locates your Calibration point and uses a warship with droptanks it can destroy your base and start stranding ships.
Originally posted by Aramis:
The TTA explicitly states you can jump to the empty hexes in those certain spots, and then puts a calibration point station at one of them (which would imply that, if one is willing to pay KCr 2.5 per Td, one could buy fuel there. (That extra KCr2 is for the shipping cost and deadhead leg on the fuel transport).
It doesn't say you can jump to all of them. (It just strongly implies that, by allowing it on all the empty hexes surrounding the spinward main.)
Not all Refs allow it. Not all refs have the big red book, either.
One key point is that, because of bulk, it is extremely expensive to ship fuel. And putting a second jump point in is even more expensive. (About three to four times as expensive.) Remember a tanker has to get in and back out again. For a jump 2 refuel point it is only 40% of the ships volume to go there and come back out. For a Jump 3 point it is 60% and for a J4 point 80%. Keeping a Jump-4 or higher route open is going to actually require intervening jump points. (And a secret Jump-6 route is actually going to require, at a minimum it be a Jump-3 route.)
To give you an example, a Jump ship (Supp-9) would require 3000 tons of jump fuel (Its normal load) to carry 2000 T of Fuel into a jump-4 point, then it would require to refuel so it can make the jump 4 back out. (2000 T.) Ooops. smile.gif
For the higher corridors, your tanker is going to have to use Drop Tanks and have enough internal fuel to jump back out just to carry a semi useful load. (And it is going to have to be large.)
Equipping your ships with droptanks instead makes more economic sense. Especially if you are jumping from a freindly base so the tanks can be recovered and reused.
For Jump-2 and Jump-3 routes, you will need 3 tankers to supply the second point. One to actually make the delivery, one to provide enough fuel for the tanker to get to the second point and one to provide the fuel for it to get back.
(And we still haven't put all that much fuel at the first point.)
Economically Calibration points don't make much sense. Militarily they make tons of sense, but building a Rift Courier actually makes more sense. (More flexibility.) After all if the enemy locates your Calibration point and uses a warship with droptanks it can destroy your base and start stranding ships.
Originally posted by Aramis:
The TTA explicitly states you can jump to the empty hexes in those certain spots, and then puts a calibration point station at one of them (which would imply that, if one is willing to pay KCr 2.5 per Td, one could buy fuel there. (That extra KCr2 is for the shipping cost and deadhead leg on the fuel transport).
It doesn't say you can jump to all of them. (It just strongly implies that, by allowing it on all the empty hexes surrounding the spinward main.)
Not all Refs allow it. Not all refs have the big red book, either.
spank
October 8th, 2004, 12:09 PM
Any idea If the tanks can be collapsed, and what the collapsed volume is?
mike wightman
October 8th, 2004, 03:46 PM
FromTCS:
Collapsible tanks - large fuel bladders installed in the cargo hold. The fuel must be pumped to the normal fuel tankege before it can be used (3hours).
When not in use they take up 1% of their full volume.
Cost 500Cr per ton.
Demountable tanks - sturdy fuel tanks that are usually installed in the cargo hold, and take up space whether full or empty. The fuel carried can be used by the ship's engines immediately.
Cost 1000Cr per ton.
Exterior demountable tanks - similar to the above, but mounted on the outside. The ship is (re)classified as unstreamlined with them mounted.
The ship's tonnage in increased by the size of the tanks, which affects engine performance.
Cost is 1500Cr per ton.
Drop tanks - similar to the above but they can be dropped before jump, increasing drive performance.
Cost 1000Cr per ton, plus the ship must be designed to accomidate them at a cost of 10000Cr or they can be added later for a cost of 1000Cr per ton.
TNE and T4 starship design added demountable tanks that can be collapsed to 25% of their full volume when not in use.
T4 added exterior conformal tanks, these can be no larger than 20% of the volume of the ship, but they maintain streamlining.
Note that T4 allows all exterior tanks to be fitted with explosive bolts so that it can be jettisoned in an emergency.
Collapsible tanks - large fuel bladders installed in the cargo hold. The fuel must be pumped to the normal fuel tankege before it can be used (3hours).
When not in use they take up 1% of their full volume.
Cost 500Cr per ton.
Demountable tanks - sturdy fuel tanks that are usually installed in the cargo hold, and take up space whether full or empty. The fuel carried can be used by the ship's engines immediately.
Cost 1000Cr per ton.
Exterior demountable tanks - similar to the above, but mounted on the outside. The ship is (re)classified as unstreamlined with them mounted.
The ship's tonnage in increased by the size of the tanks, which affects engine performance.
Cost is 1500Cr per ton.
Drop tanks - similar to the above but they can be dropped before jump, increasing drive performance.
Cost 1000Cr per ton, plus the ship must be designed to accomidate them at a cost of 10000Cr or they can be added later for a cost of 1000Cr per ton.
TNE and T4 starship design added demountable tanks that can be collapsed to 25% of their full volume when not in use.
T4 added exterior conformal tanks, these can be no larger than 20% of the volume of the ship, but they maintain streamlining.
Note that T4 allows all exterior tanks to be fitted with explosive bolts so that it can be jettisoned in an emergency.
Spinward Scout
October 8th, 2004, 09:37 PM
Wow - what a lot of great ideas! Thanks everybody. I can't get online but once a week. Sorry I haven't said anything.
Hope everyone is doing great!
Scout
Hope everyone is doing great!
Scout
aramis
October 8th, 2004, 10:25 PM
Ecomomics of calibration points make a single jump-2 CP viable.
Keep in mind, most commercial ships can make money (with a good crew and some patience) on 2J2 tankage aboard; careful selection (and being able to wait for a full load; or alternatively, having a warehouse which collects load materials ahead of time) can make a refueled in deep space jump viable; therefore, collapseables make sense for covering, say, a J8 rift. Load that A2 with full Collapseables for a second J2, jump 2 to a CP, 2J2 to next cp, then refuel 1 J2 and j2 in to destination. It cuts typical profit margins to nil, but on a good run (or with a good broker aboard or at both ends), such a run can turn a decent profit. This is true under Bk2 and T20 (had players do it in both), but not under MT/TNE/T4/CTBk7... the MP system reduces profit margin potential, while raising the floor somewhat.
Two of those jumps fuel cost is 5 times, assuming normal shipping rate doubled for the deadhead back from the CP. Yes, it's 4 jumps, for a 6-7 week cycle, but with a good broker and warehouse, it can provide steady runs. Just restrict yourself to cargos with more than KCr6 expected adjustment per ton for your broker. (IE, if your broker value is high, say 3, and that can be expected to shift 10% per level, then you need values of KCr10 per ton base or better.) Trader skill becomes valuable for getting that first die on the table BEFORE committing to purchase. If it's a 1, go for it. If its a 6, forget it.
Actual shipping cost per ton (assumign all fuel bought) on a 2J2 CP Refueler at 1000Td under HG runs to (salaries and payment included) KCr3 per ton; thus the J2 CP should charge 3500 CR per ton. If it buys unrefined, and refines its own, that can be pushed down a tad.
Keep in mind, most commercial ships can make money (with a good crew and some patience) on 2J2 tankage aboard; careful selection (and being able to wait for a full load; or alternatively, having a warehouse which collects load materials ahead of time) can make a refueled in deep space jump viable; therefore, collapseables make sense for covering, say, a J8 rift. Load that A2 with full Collapseables for a second J2, jump 2 to a CP, 2J2 to next cp, then refuel 1 J2 and j2 in to destination. It cuts typical profit margins to nil, but on a good run (or with a good broker aboard or at both ends), such a run can turn a decent profit. This is true under Bk2 and T20 (had players do it in both), but not under MT/TNE/T4/CTBk7... the MP system reduces profit margin potential, while raising the floor somewhat.
Two of those jumps fuel cost is 5 times, assuming normal shipping rate doubled for the deadhead back from the CP. Yes, it's 4 jumps, for a 6-7 week cycle, but with a good broker and warehouse, it can provide steady runs. Just restrict yourself to cargos with more than KCr6 expected adjustment per ton for your broker. (IE, if your broker value is high, say 3, and that can be expected to shift 10% per level, then you need values of KCr10 per ton base or better.) Trader skill becomes valuable for getting that first die on the table BEFORE committing to purchase. If it's a 1, go for it. If its a 6, forget it.
Actual shipping cost per ton (assumign all fuel bought) on a 2J2 CP Refueler at 1000Td under HG runs to (salaries and payment included) KCr3 per ton; thus the J2 CP should charge 3500 CR per ton. If it buys unrefined, and refines its own, that can be pushed down a tad.
BetterThanLife
October 9th, 2004, 03:09 AM
A single jump 2 calibration point? But you are putting it out at J-4. How do you keep it supplied with fuel? That is where the economics fall apart. Keeping the tanks full. If you don't use drop tanks then 80 percent of your load is fuel for the trip. If you do use drop tanks at the start of the run then 60% of your tonnage is fuel for the trip. How do you carry enough fuel to make the CP work? To have a useful load of fuel available at the calibration pointYou would have to be able to tank up 2 parsecs from the calibration point. Then ou will still be limited to less than 40% of your mass in deliverable fuel. (Even if you are running a flying gas can.) Jump 6 is worse. (Though if you are using huge tankers to ensure passage by small couriers it would work. Which is why it makes sense for the Navy to set up such an endeavor.)
How would this work in terms of Cargo. Cargo is paid based on transit to an announced destination. A flat rate of 1000Cr per ton. (Regardless of distance.) Now fuel expended in this plan works out to burning no less than 3 times the fuel you deliver. (If you are maxed out in fuel that you are delivering. ) (To the second jump 2 CP or to the Jump 4 CP.) (ANd that ignores PP fuel.)
Am I figuring this worng?
How would this work in terms of Cargo. Cargo is paid based on transit to an announced destination. A flat rate of 1000Cr per ton. (Regardless of distance.) Now fuel expended in this plan works out to burning no less than 3 times the fuel you deliver. (If you are maxed out in fuel that you are delivering. ) (To the second jump 2 CP or to the Jump 4 CP.) (ANd that ignores PP fuel.)
Am I figuring this worng?
mike wightman
October 9th, 2004, 03:23 AM
There is a difference between an empty hex and a callibration point.
From The Regency Sourcebook:
...they consist of a natural source of hydrogen, typically a comet nucleus or other icy body, but rogue planets are rarely found and used for these purposes. These natural calibration points are discovered and exploited, not constructed.
From The Regency Sourcebook:
...they consist of a natural source of hydrogen, typically a comet nucleus or other icy body, but rogue planets are rarely found and used for these purposes. These natural calibration points are discovered and exploited, not constructed.
aramis
October 9th, 2004, 04:08 AM
Bhoins:
I'm putting civil CP's at J2 out from each end of a J8 path.
the 2J2 tanker is 1000Td, crew 5, a little over 400 Td fuel DELIVERED, exclusive of own ops fuel for both j2, out and back, under HG design sequences. Big thing is the MCr1.4___ per month payments; on a subsidized route, the ops costs drop RADICALLY. I got the above nummbers by taking the cost of crew, ops fuel (4wk, 2j2), and crew salaries by CT (TTB). Total this for the month (which works out to be the ops cycle), and divide all this by the cargo space available, and you get a cost per ton to ship (deadhead leg included). This is figuring actual costs to the ship; since the actual costs well exceed the listed freight rates, and the situation is exceptional (if not extortional), figuring out the costs is a viable method of determining how much they'll charge for fuel... or LS replenishment!
The whole point is that you can get most A2's across 8 Parsecs if need be. (Cost per ton goes up to almost 8K for the second hop, as the fuel costs go up by a factor of 7; having a few sets of demountables hanging by is probably a good investment...)
If you have a large tank farm with a small PP, Command Center/hab, and FPP, you can haul unrefined out to it, and refine on site...making Cr400 per ton right there...
To Explain the setup better, each {_} is a hex
{A}{_}{1}{_}{_}{_}{2}{_}{B}
A-B straight run: 8 Pc
A-1: 2Pc
1-2: 4 Pc (2j2)
2-B: 2 Pc
Useage: an A2 with demountables for second J2 fuel.
Loads full fuel tankage: jumps to 1. Refils to 2J2 aboard, plus 4 wks LS & PP.
Jumps to emty spot in middle. Jumps again to reach CP2. Refills to 1J2, and at least 2 weeks worth of pp and LS, just for safety, and jumps on to B.
that's 80 Td at normal cost, and 80 Td at 7x normal cost; plus PP and LS recharges.the 6 week total op is only 3x normal crew costs and payment set-asides, despite the 4 jumps... so a really good load can make it profitable.
Under MT/TNE, it's actually better (fuelwise) to use a single J4 drive (25% hull) rather than a J2 with 2 jumps of fuel (30% of hull), and still use a 3 jump schedule. (A-1-2-B) Mostly because you can't afford to put a CP at 4 hx out; fuel costs become ansolutely prohibitive. (more
Under all editions: if you have Reuseable external drop tanks, customers without 2Jx can borrow them from you, you recover them after their jump, and have them ready for next customer.
as for the RegSB entry: that's one form of CP, and the one used in that book to exclusion of other uses. Other items (colloquially referred to as CP) are sometimes stations.
This kind of situation IS PRICEY... but it is feasable, especailly for some of the islands cluster and other, similarly isolated, systems.
I'm putting civil CP's at J2 out from each end of a J8 path.
the 2J2 tanker is 1000Td, crew 5, a little over 400 Td fuel DELIVERED, exclusive of own ops fuel for both j2, out and back, under HG design sequences. Big thing is the MCr1.4___ per month payments; on a subsidized route, the ops costs drop RADICALLY. I got the above nummbers by taking the cost of crew, ops fuel (4wk, 2j2), and crew salaries by CT (TTB). Total this for the month (which works out to be the ops cycle), and divide all this by the cargo space available, and you get a cost per ton to ship (deadhead leg included). This is figuring actual costs to the ship; since the actual costs well exceed the listed freight rates, and the situation is exceptional (if not extortional), figuring out the costs is a viable method of determining how much they'll charge for fuel... or LS replenishment!
The whole point is that you can get most A2's across 8 Parsecs if need be. (Cost per ton goes up to almost 8K for the second hop, as the fuel costs go up by a factor of 7; having a few sets of demountables hanging by is probably a good investment...)
If you have a large tank farm with a small PP, Command Center/hab, and FPP, you can haul unrefined out to it, and refine on site...making Cr400 per ton right there...
To Explain the setup better, each {_} is a hex
{A}{_}{1}{_}{_}{_}{2}{_}{B}
A-B straight run: 8 Pc
A-1: 2Pc
1-2: 4 Pc (2j2)
2-B: 2 Pc
Useage: an A2 with demountables for second J2 fuel.
Loads full fuel tankage: jumps to 1. Refils to 2J2 aboard, plus 4 wks LS & PP.
Jumps to emty spot in middle. Jumps again to reach CP2. Refills to 1J2, and at least 2 weeks worth of pp and LS, just for safety, and jumps on to B.
that's 80 Td at normal cost, and 80 Td at 7x normal cost; plus PP and LS recharges.the 6 week total op is only 3x normal crew costs and payment set-asides, despite the 4 jumps... so a really good load can make it profitable.
Under MT/TNE, it's actually better (fuelwise) to use a single J4 drive (25% hull) rather than a J2 with 2 jumps of fuel (30% of hull), and still use a 3 jump schedule. (A-1-2-B) Mostly because you can't afford to put a CP at 4 hx out; fuel costs become ansolutely prohibitive. (more
Under all editions: if you have Reuseable external drop tanks, customers without 2Jx can borrow them from you, you recover them after their jump, and have them ready for next customer.
as for the RegSB entry: that's one form of CP, and the one used in that book to exclusion of other uses. Other items (colloquially referred to as CP) are sometimes stations.
This kind of situation IS PRICEY... but it is feasable, especailly for some of the islands cluster and other, similarly isolated, systems.
BetterThanLife
October 9th, 2004, 12:58 PM
Aramis,
OK that does work. Though you certainly aren't shipping at standard rates. smile.gif On the other hand to cross that same space if you had a starship with J-3 drives and Drop tanks you could hit the station on the far side wihtout hitting the near side one. And then you would only be buying J2 fuel at the inflated prices (or assuming your company owns the CP) inflated costs. You would also have to have stations on either side but I would assume you had those anyway to start the tanker voyages. And yes that is definitely preferable to establishing a CP in the middle.
Fueling a refueling station more than jump 2 from the edge of a rift, or rather more than jump 2 from the source of fuel, is an extremely expensive proposition.
As an example has anyone, besides me, tried to make a run to Research Station Delta (RETINAE/Querion/Spinward Marches) from the Imperial side? Especially if you can't go through Swordworld or Zhodani space.
It is possible Just a pain in the butt. You need, at a minimum, J4 fuel tankage and refining capability. A Subliner could do it if it had a purification plant and carried Jump-1 fuel in the cargo hold. (A patrol Cruiser can do the same thing.)
Here is another silly question, how does a major transit hub, not on a main without water and without a Gas Giant maintain a Class A or B Starport? Obviously it is subsidized, but would fuel prices be higher? There are a couple that are even on XBoat routes! I mean the starport would have to pay Cr1000 per ton to get fuel in. (Freight cost) And even if they own the ships they are still paying one way or the other. And they are only charging Cr500 for refined or Cr100 for unrefined? You could of course go with speculative trade, scoop it yourself, refine it fill your holds with it and get Cr800-900 per ton. smile.gif But it is better to charge them freight cost for it. The ship does have to make mortgage payments. smile.gif
OK that does work. Though you certainly aren't shipping at standard rates. smile.gif On the other hand to cross that same space if you had a starship with J-3 drives and Drop tanks you could hit the station on the far side wihtout hitting the near side one. And then you would only be buying J2 fuel at the inflated prices (or assuming your company owns the CP) inflated costs. You would also have to have stations on either side but I would assume you had those anyway to start the tanker voyages. And yes that is definitely preferable to establishing a CP in the middle.
Fueling a refueling station more than jump 2 from the edge of a rift, or rather more than jump 2 from the source of fuel, is an extremely expensive proposition.
As an example has anyone, besides me, tried to make a run to Research Station Delta (RETINAE/Querion/Spinward Marches) from the Imperial side? Especially if you can't go through Swordworld or Zhodani space.
It is possible Just a pain in the butt. You need, at a minimum, J4 fuel tankage and refining capability. A Subliner could do it if it had a purification plant and carried Jump-1 fuel in the cargo hold. (A patrol Cruiser can do the same thing.)
Here is another silly question, how does a major transit hub, not on a main without water and without a Gas Giant maintain a Class A or B Starport? Obviously it is subsidized, but would fuel prices be higher? There are a couple that are even on XBoat routes! I mean the starport would have to pay Cr1000 per ton to get fuel in. (Freight cost) And even if they own the ships they are still paying one way or the other. And they are only charging Cr500 for refined or Cr100 for unrefined? You could of course go with speculative trade, scoop it yourself, refine it fill your holds with it and get Cr800-900 per ton. smile.gif But it is better to charge them freight cost for it. The ship does have to make mortgage payments. smile.gif
Straybow
October 9th, 2004, 10:16 PM
Exterior tanks don't work with the idea that ship hulls have a jump grid on the outside. You wouldn't be able to mount anything substantial to the hull and still be able to jump.
The jump grid for the ship would have to be designed to work with the exterior tanks, and those tank would have to have part of the grid on them.
How much of the jump engine cost and tonnage is assigned to the hull grid? Drop tanks could be far too expensive.
The jump grid for the ship would have to be designed to work with the exterior tanks, and those tank would have to have part of the grid on them.
How much of the jump engine cost and tonnage is assigned to the hull grid? Drop tanks could be far too expensive.
mike wightman
October 10th, 2004, 12:03 AM
T4's FF&S2 specifically mentions hull grids and allows exterior tanks.
It's probably why they cost so much...
Drop tanks, on the other hand, would only need the hull grid extension if you don't drop them.
It's probably why they cost so much...
Drop tanks, on the other hand, would only need the hull grid extension if you don't drop them.
aramis
October 10th, 2004, 03:42 AM
Bhoins: There are numerous ways to get that hydrogen, and many of them are surprisingly abundant sources.
Solar Skimming: Capturing charged flows of mostly hydrogen from, say, orbits 0-1. Not terribly efficient, but very doable with large scale magnetic and gravitic technologies.
Ammonia and Methane: Just cause there's no H2O doesn't mean no ammonia nor methane, nor Hydrogen Sulfide. All of which can be cracked for Hydrogen.
Other non-main worlds in system: few CT/MT/TNE systems are single orbital body systems; in fact, it's hard to wind up with a system without ANY hydrographics listed. And even then, A planetoid belt is likely to contain hydrogen sources if outside the ecosphere.
Atom Smashing: while not likely to be economically feasable, one can make some Hydrogen by smashing atoms together with the right velocities and ionizations. Usually while doing so for makeing much heavier stuff. And some of it is even duterium and tritium!
Oort Mining: Think 2J1 drive Colliers, in the 1-20KTd range. Jump to an oort object, collect it, refine it, jump back. Likely to do all refining aboard, simply for the sake of refuelling self. And the number of Oort/Kuyper objects estimated is actually terrifyingly large... even tho the denisty is way low.
The Kuyper/Oort mining and planetoid mining are the most universal. Costs per ton are actually well below the 500 for refned fuel, despite being hauled in... as fuel is free, and crew can be roboticised out for all but the most key positions. 2J1,M1,P1 means fairly cheap, and low crew need. Using robots for maintenance and engineering ratings removes the SR needs for those crewmen, but adds up-front capital costs.
Under MT, those tytpe systems can actually turn a decent profit.
Now, if you hae another world whcih is awlays less than 6 days away, and has ammonia, methane, or water, you can buid a Large Craft with even more efficiency.
Solar gathering is an extreme solution... but most of the "solar wind" is ionized hydrogen. Again, automation drives down costs, and reduces risks. Magnetic and gravitic condensation would make it collectable.
Solar Skimming: Capturing charged flows of mostly hydrogen from, say, orbits 0-1. Not terribly efficient, but very doable with large scale magnetic and gravitic technologies.
Ammonia and Methane: Just cause there's no H2O doesn't mean no ammonia nor methane, nor Hydrogen Sulfide. All of which can be cracked for Hydrogen.
Other non-main worlds in system: few CT/MT/TNE systems are single orbital body systems; in fact, it's hard to wind up with a system without ANY hydrographics listed. And even then, A planetoid belt is likely to contain hydrogen sources if outside the ecosphere.
Atom Smashing: while not likely to be economically feasable, one can make some Hydrogen by smashing atoms together with the right velocities and ionizations. Usually while doing so for makeing much heavier stuff. And some of it is even duterium and tritium!
Oort Mining: Think 2J1 drive Colliers, in the 1-20KTd range. Jump to an oort object, collect it, refine it, jump back. Likely to do all refining aboard, simply for the sake of refuelling self. And the number of Oort/Kuyper objects estimated is actually terrifyingly large... even tho the denisty is way low.
The Kuyper/Oort mining and planetoid mining are the most universal. Costs per ton are actually well below the 500 for refned fuel, despite being hauled in... as fuel is free, and crew can be roboticised out for all but the most key positions. 2J1,M1,P1 means fairly cheap, and low crew need. Using robots for maintenance and engineering ratings removes the SR needs for those crewmen, but adds up-front capital costs.
Under MT, those tytpe systems can actually turn a decent profit.
Now, if you hae another world whcih is awlays less than 6 days away, and has ammonia, methane, or water, you can buid a Large Craft with even more efficiency.
Solar gathering is an extreme solution... but most of the "solar wind" is ionized hydrogen. Again, automation drives down costs, and reduces risks. Magnetic and gravitic condensation would make it collectable.
BetterThanLife
October 10th, 2004, 04:23 AM
Straybow: Drop tanks, while expensive aren't exceptionally so and have been in traveller since LBB5 (High Guard). They are just something that is too expensive for normal use. And to really make them economically viable you have to have someone behind to recover them for you. Couriers, by there very nature, are not economically feasible ships, but they are definitely in use especially in the military. A Courier travelling from Naval Base to naval base would be the ideal use of drop tanks.
The second use would be the CE class. They use the Drop tanks for extra fuel undernormal operations but can drop them for better maneuverability or for high jumps.
The second use would be the CE class. They use the Drop tanks for extra fuel undernormal operations but can drop them for better maneuverability or for high jumps.
BetterThanLife
October 10th, 2004, 04:32 AM
Aramis: I know it is fairly rare for a system to be listed as having no gas giant and hydrographic percentage of 0. But for some reason there are three Class A Starports, that happen to be SUbsector Capitals that have no Gas Giant and no water. LUNION, Frenzie and ARAMIS, in the Spinward Marches. They even all have Naval bases. I just thought it a serious anonomaly that Three systems of obvious importance would have no ready source of fuel. Since the area was settled using Fusion powerplants, and jump drives one would think that these worlds would tend to be avoided and not developed into major systems.
I am not saying there is no fuel sources in those systems, but they are definitely not in the area of the Primary olanet in the system.
I am not saying there is no fuel sources in those systems, but they are definitely not in the area of the Primary olanet in the system.
mike wightman
October 10th, 2004, 04:46 AM
Alternatively those worlds you mentioned have laws against civilians refueling anywhere but the starport, hence the lack of water and gas giant symbol on the travel chart.
The fact that they all have Naval bases could be explained that the military restricts civillian refueling.
Plus, considering the cost of fuel processing plants, restricting the buying of fuel to the starport only is a licence for the fuel companies to print money ;)
The fact that they all have Naval bases could be explained that the military restricts civillian refueling.
Plus, considering the cost of fuel processing plants, restricting the buying of fuel to the starport only is a licence for the fuel companies to print money ;)
aramis
October 10th, 2004, 05:16 PM
Aramis has a non-breathable atmosphere, and the city is underground. An atmosphere thatcould be mined for LHyd. (In fact, I suspect strongly that that is, in fact, the method.) It also has a scout base.
I'm not memory-conversant with the others.
Also not mentioned is moons: We can inferr from TTA that Aramis does not have a moon. The others might.
(heck, it's my second favorite world in the CT/MT TU... Wypoc is my favorite...)
I'm not memory-conversant with the others.
Also not mentioned is moons: We can inferr from TTA that Aramis does not have a moon. The others might.
(heck, it's my second favorite world in the CT/MT TU... Wypoc is my favorite...)
mike wightman
October 10th, 2004, 05:24 PM
I've got to ask - why Wypoc???
phil644441
October 11th, 2004, 01:27 AM
<<slightly off-topic>>
As a teacher, it suddenly struck me how similar 'our' corporate attitude to gas giants and other sources of ready hydrogen is to the early industrial attitude to fossil fuels - our starships are dependent on non-sustainable fuel sources - for some races this might be OK but surely some galactic eco-nazis must be on the scene who would have a problem with this attitude from the 'younger' space travelling civilisations...?
AK
As a teacher, it suddenly struck me how similar 'our' corporate attitude to gas giants and other sources of ready hydrogen is to the early industrial attitude to fossil fuels - our starships are dependent on non-sustainable fuel sources - for some races this might be OK but surely some galactic eco-nazis must be on the scene who would have a problem with this attitude from the 'younger' space travelling civilisations...?
AK
BetterThanLife
October 11th, 2004, 02:14 AM
I am sure there are some, afterall we have Fanatic Vegitarians out to rid the Universe of Carnivores and Omnivores. smile.gif
Are you advocating Wood burning powerplants?
Originally posted by Aristotle Kzin:
<<slightly off-topic>>
As a teacher, it suddenly struck me how similar 'our' corporate attitude to gas giants and other sources of ready hydrogen is to the early industrial attitude to fossil fuels - our starships are dependent on non-sustainable fuel sources - for some races this might be OK but surely some galactic eco-nazis must be on the scene who would have a problem with this attitude from the 'younger' space travelling civilisations...?
AK
Are you advocating Wood burning powerplants?
Originally posted by Aristotle Kzin:
<<slightly off-topic>>
As a teacher, it suddenly struck me how similar 'our' corporate attitude to gas giants and other sources of ready hydrogen is to the early industrial attitude to fossil fuels - our starships are dependent on non-sustainable fuel sources - for some races this might be OK but surely some galactic eco-nazis must be on the scene who would have a problem with this attitude from the 'younger' space travelling civilisations...?
AK
phil644441
October 11th, 2004, 04:26 AM
A return to fossil fuels? No.
I remember reading a theory somewhere, sometime, from a science fiction writer (Larry Niven?) that, in the long term, the big surplus produced by civilisation is HEAT - and this is a truly unwanted by-product. Now, excess heat (energy) ought to be easy to convert into a form of energy usable by starships (stored in nano-batteries, maybe?) so that the starships run on something there is certainly too much of and something of which there is an endless supply as long as civilisation exists (and if civilisation doesn't exist, starships don't need fuel!).
If we wanted a longer discussion on this we should probably start a new thread.....
AK
I remember reading a theory somewhere, sometime, from a science fiction writer (Larry Niven?) that, in the long term, the big surplus produced by civilisation is HEAT - and this is a truly unwanted by-product. Now, excess heat (energy) ought to be easy to convert into a form of energy usable by starships (stored in nano-batteries, maybe?) so that the starships run on something there is certainly too much of and something of which there is an endless supply as long as civilisation exists (and if civilisation doesn't exist, starships don't need fuel!).
If we wanted a longer discussion on this we should probably start a new thread.....
AK
PBI
October 11th, 2004, 03:06 PM
The issue really depends on who is doing the crossing and why.
If the crossing of a large enough rift is being undertaken for military reasons, the solution is simple. Build deep space bases and set up a regular supply run of fuel, etc to them using tankers and/or bulk transports. High-jump ships pop in, gas up, and continue on their merry way until they get out of the rift. It's expensive, and time-consuming, but sometimes you just don't have a choice.
If the people doing the crossing are non-gov't types, well, they won't. It just doesn't make economic sense to try and get across a rift. Much better to go around. IFF there is no way around, well, you will see commercial activity crossing the rift once enough shiny new resources have been discovered on the other side.
If the crossing of a large enough rift is being undertaken for military reasons, the solution is simple. Build deep space bases and set up a regular supply run of fuel, etc to them using tankers and/or bulk transports. High-jump ships pop in, gas up, and continue on their merry way until they get out of the rift. It's expensive, and time-consuming, but sometimes you just don't have a choice.
If the people doing the crossing are non-gov't types, well, they won't. It just doesn't make economic sense to try and get across a rift. Much better to go around. IFF there is no way around, well, you will see commercial activity crossing the rift once enough shiny new resources have been discovered on the other side.
aramis
October 11th, 2004, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
I've got to ask - why Wypoc??? One, Location. It's J2 from Regina, on a mini-main. Esentially, in the middle of things, but yet insignificant.
Two: it's got an insidious atmosphere, and a population. Makes them probably practical people. Especially since it defeats suits in 8 hours...
Three: It's one of the first worlds I detailed out IMTU. And I randomly rolled multi-ton flying pouncers... There be Dragons on Wypoc. And (again by random luck) pistol equipped herbivores... which made me think of Thundarr's pet.
Four: it's chock full of adventure possibilities.
five: my players tke great delight in surviving a dragon hunt.
:D
But it has little to do with crossing rifts.... unless one means corssing Rifts(TM) into Traveller...
I've got to ask - why Wypoc??? One, Location. It's J2 from Regina, on a mini-main. Esentially, in the middle of things, but yet insignificant.
Two: it's got an insidious atmosphere, and a population. Makes them probably practical people. Especially since it defeats suits in 8 hours...
Three: It's one of the first worlds I detailed out IMTU. And I randomly rolled multi-ton flying pouncers... There be Dragons on Wypoc. And (again by random luck) pistol equipped herbivores... which made me think of Thundarr's pet.
Four: it's chock full of adventure possibilities.
five: my players tke great delight in surviving a dragon hunt.
:D
But it has little to do with crossing rifts.... unless one means corssing Rifts(TM) into Traveller...
BetterThanLife
October 12th, 2004, 03:09 PM
Actually most systems that have gas giants present or water present and laws prohibiting civilians from using them still have them marked on the map.
From the printed material, unrestricted wilderness refueling where the system is sufficeintly technologically advanced to have a space capability and a better than Class E starport generally restrict or prohibit wilderness refueling.
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Alternatively those worlds you mentioned have laws against civilians refueling anywhere but the starport, hence the lack of water and gas giant symbol on the travel chart.
The fact that they all have Naval bases could be explained that the military restricts civillian refueling.
Plus, considering the cost of fuel processing plants, restricting the buying of fuel to the starport only is a licence for the fuel companies to print money ;)
From the printed material, unrestricted wilderness refueling where the system is sufficeintly technologically advanced to have a space capability and a better than Class E starport generally restrict or prohibit wilderness refueling.
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Alternatively those worlds you mentioned have laws against civilians refueling anywhere but the starport, hence the lack of water and gas giant symbol on the travel chart.
The fact that they all have Naval bases could be explained that the military restricts civillian refueling.
Plus, considering the cost of fuel processing plants, restricting the buying of fuel to the starport only is a licence for the fuel companies to print money ;)
Spinward Scout
October 12th, 2004, 04:03 PM
Well, there are some damn great answers in here. What I think I was looking for, was a way to not just use one ship, but set up a series of ships and stations/fuel outposts, so that you can indefinitely run a rift using Jump-1 ships (i.e. not having to go around using Corridor sector). I would think that a 1000+ year old government would find it cheaper in the long run to build something like this. 15-30 parsecs crossed is a whole lot cheaper in fuel than a 60-90+ parsec journey, I would think. Just one Fueling Station Run across the rift in Reft sector would cut down on a lot of fuel burned, and Vargr raids most likely. Nobody ever said those Imperials were smart. But how long would something like this take to set up? If you are only covering maybe 30 parsecs, you could conceivably have something up and running within a year. Now if you were a private company, and partnered with the military so they could get their fuel at a discount or such, maybe in return for "protection"... How would you go about this?
Scout
Scout
PBI
October 12th, 2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Sir Dameon Toth:
Well, there are some damn great answers in here. What I think I was looking for, was a way to not just use one ship, but set up a series of ships and stations/fuel outposts, so that you can indefinitely run a rift using Jump-1 ships (i.e. not having to go around using Corridor sector). I would think that a 1000+ year old government would find it cheaper in the long run to build something like this. 15-30 parsecs crossed is a whole lot cheaper in fuel than a 60-90+ parsec journey, I would think. Just one Fueling Station Run across the rift in Reft sector would cut down on a lot of fuel burned, and Vargr raids most likely. Nobody ever said those Imperials were smart. But how long would something like this take to set up? If you are only covering maybe 30 parsecs, you could conceivably have something up and running within a year. Now if you were a private company, and partnered with the military so they could get their fuel at a discount or such, maybe in return for "protection"... How would you go about this?
Scout You've just answered yourself in terms of how you would go about it smile.gif Put deep space bases in place that are essentially some crew pods, some cargo pods (spare parts for repair and the like) and a fuel park of unpowered pods full of H2. The trick comes in the fact that these bases would be totally dependant on tankers for resupply, both of their own power plants and to restock the fuel park. The shorter the route, the easier it is, but once you start getting into the 2-3 jump range from either end, things can get a might interesting.
It might, indeed, be possible to make such a route commercially viable when looked at from the perspective of individual ships and companies, but I'm not so certain that would hold true when the costs of operating all those tankers and transports required to keep the bases alive is factored in.
I still maintain that such a route would only make sense if the strategic need was great and pressing and I couldn't see the expense being worth it to set up a route of less than J3, but, everything depends on perspective. If such a route is deemed vital to the interests of a polity, it'll get built smile.gif
As a slight FWIW, a friend and I are playing a TCS/FFW game in a home-generated universe (each of us controlling about a sector) and my friend has a network of bases set up to get across a rift. He's set up his network at J4. In order to keep the network supplied (fuel for the fuel parks is the greatest concern), he uses 1,000,000 J6 girders overloaded to J4 to deliver fuel, replacement crew and parts, and to set up new bases and/or act as tugs. He uses his J6 girders as multi-mission fleet support ships (troop transports, tenders, etc) and doesn't have a lot of them to use with the fleet because the rift network takes up something like 75% of the girder force.
The point is, it can be done, but it's a logistical headache and can be a significant resource drain that has to be seriously considered and re-considered before implementing.
Well, there are some damn great answers in here. What I think I was looking for, was a way to not just use one ship, but set up a series of ships and stations/fuel outposts, so that you can indefinitely run a rift using Jump-1 ships (i.e. not having to go around using Corridor sector). I would think that a 1000+ year old government would find it cheaper in the long run to build something like this. 15-30 parsecs crossed is a whole lot cheaper in fuel than a 60-90+ parsec journey, I would think. Just one Fueling Station Run across the rift in Reft sector would cut down on a lot of fuel burned, and Vargr raids most likely. Nobody ever said those Imperials were smart. But how long would something like this take to set up? If you are only covering maybe 30 parsecs, you could conceivably have something up and running within a year. Now if you were a private company, and partnered with the military so they could get their fuel at a discount or such, maybe in return for "protection"... How would you go about this?
Scout You've just answered yourself in terms of how you would go about it smile.gif Put deep space bases in place that are essentially some crew pods, some cargo pods (spare parts for repair and the like) and a fuel park of unpowered pods full of H2. The trick comes in the fact that these bases would be totally dependant on tankers for resupply, both of their own power plants and to restock the fuel park. The shorter the route, the easier it is, but once you start getting into the 2-3 jump range from either end, things can get a might interesting.
It might, indeed, be possible to make such a route commercially viable when looked at from the perspective of individual ships and companies, but I'm not so certain that would hold true when the costs of operating all those tankers and transports required to keep the bases alive is factored in.
I still maintain that such a route would only make sense if the strategic need was great and pressing and I couldn't see the expense being worth it to set up a route of less than J3, but, everything depends on perspective. If such a route is deemed vital to the interests of a polity, it'll get built smile.gif
As a slight FWIW, a friend and I are playing a TCS/FFW game in a home-generated universe (each of us controlling about a sector) and my friend has a network of bases set up to get across a rift. He's set up his network at J4. In order to keep the network supplied (fuel for the fuel parks is the greatest concern), he uses 1,000,000 J6 girders overloaded to J4 to deliver fuel, replacement crew and parts, and to set up new bases and/or act as tugs. He uses his J6 girders as multi-mission fleet support ships (troop transports, tenders, etc) and doesn't have a lot of them to use with the fleet because the rift network takes up something like 75% of the girder force.
The point is, it can be done, but it's a logistical headache and can be a significant resource drain that has to be seriously considered and re-considered before implementing.
Simone
October 21st, 2004, 05:49 PM
use "hulls" constructed from ice ball asteroids, the drives, bridge, life support (no maneuver) fit in some standardized "pod", a pod contains the drives, crew cabins, etc (a pepsi-can type arrangement, with a big ball of ice stuck on it)
The pod gets carried back as cargo, stackable, modular, dull.
I can visualise a big rubber bag sort of deal, melt the H20 to craft the "hulls", squirt H20 in bag, allow to freeze in a sphere (efficient form)
Build your "craft" in the Oort cloud if available, else stage them up to most forward J point, well beyond the ice point in the jumpoff star system, the last one with mucho agua.
If I remember correctly, rough numbers and CT, YMMV, let's use a 1000 dton "hull" (efficient!)
J4 drive requires J 'V' =105 dtons 105
minimum power plant E = 16 dtons 16
fuel to jump it 4 parsecs (ice ball!) 400
hull (asteroid, ice, payload, I cheat!) 0
life support minimum crew
(pilot,1 eng per 35tons plants)
(for 1000 hull, need 14%drives, 140dtons)
so 1 pilot, 4 eng, 5 cabins = 20
bridge(minimum 20dton 1000hull) 20
0 maneuver fuel
10Pn = 10 tons = 10 = 571
I will throw away the 29 tons as fudge factor, mounting brackets etc and use round numbers.
roughly 600 dtons of "ship" to get 400 tons of ice = fuel on target
If Lhyd is the Fuel, the 29 tons becomes demountable tankage, I dunno the numbers, it just reduces the efficiency a touch.
suitable fudge factor, say 40%payload?
fair! discussion? is that about right?
To get my "tin can" back, 200 tons of Cargo, I need to stack 3 of them up with a 400 ton ice ball
to get home.
The net is 3 go out, 3 come back, leaving 800 tons of fuel 4 parsecs out.
Repeat ad nauseum, YMMV depending on which flavour of Traveller is your favorite, but I think you could do it recursively pretty easy, let's see,
1 stack = 3 such ships
1 stack JUMP TO => point A, and back, leaving 800 tons ice (a team), twice a month = 1600 tons ice a month at point A
unnhh...
My mind is old and feeble, would someone more alert do the rest, time for a little nap ... perhaps a little warm milk, thank you nurse ...
sojourner out
The pod gets carried back as cargo, stackable, modular, dull.
I can visualise a big rubber bag sort of deal, melt the H20 to craft the "hulls", squirt H20 in bag, allow to freeze in a sphere (efficient form)
Build your "craft" in the Oort cloud if available, else stage them up to most forward J point, well beyond the ice point in the jumpoff star system, the last one with mucho agua.
If I remember correctly, rough numbers and CT, YMMV, let's use a 1000 dton "hull" (efficient!)
J4 drive requires J 'V' =105 dtons 105
minimum power plant E = 16 dtons 16
fuel to jump it 4 parsecs (ice ball!) 400
hull (asteroid, ice, payload, I cheat!) 0
life support minimum crew
(pilot,1 eng per 35tons plants)
(for 1000 hull, need 14%drives, 140dtons)
so 1 pilot, 4 eng, 5 cabins = 20
bridge(minimum 20dton 1000hull) 20
0 maneuver fuel
10Pn = 10 tons = 10 = 571
I will throw away the 29 tons as fudge factor, mounting brackets etc and use round numbers.
roughly 600 dtons of "ship" to get 400 tons of ice = fuel on target
If Lhyd is the Fuel, the 29 tons becomes demountable tankage, I dunno the numbers, it just reduces the efficiency a touch.
suitable fudge factor, say 40%payload?
fair! discussion? is that about right?
To get my "tin can" back, 200 tons of Cargo, I need to stack 3 of them up with a 400 ton ice ball
to get home.
The net is 3 go out, 3 come back, leaving 800 tons of fuel 4 parsecs out.
Repeat ad nauseum, YMMV depending on which flavour of Traveller is your favorite, but I think you could do it recursively pretty easy, let's see,
1 stack = 3 such ships
1 stack JUMP TO => point A, and back, leaving 800 tons ice (a team), twice a month = 1600 tons ice a month at point A
unnhh...
My mind is old and feeble, would someone more alert do the rest, time for a little nap ... perhaps a little warm milk, thank you nurse ...
sojourner out
BetterThanLife
October 22nd, 2004, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by Sir Dameon Toth:
Well, there are some damn great answers in here. What I think I was looking for, was a way to not just use one ship, but set up a series of ships and stations/fuel outposts, so that you can indefinitely run a rift using Jump-1 ships (i.e. not having to go around using Corridor sector). I would think that a 1000+ year old government would find it cheaper in the long run to build something like this. 15-30 parsecs crossed is a whole lot cheaper in fuel than a 60-90+ parsec journey, I would think. Just one Fueling Station Run across the rift in Reft sector would cut down on a lot of fuel burned, and Vargr raids most likely. Nobody ever said those Imperials were smart. But how long would something like this take to set up? If you are only covering maybe 30 parsecs, you could conceivably have something up and running within a year. Now if you were a private company, and partnered with the military so they could get their fuel at a discount or such, maybe in return for "protection"... How would you go about this?
Scout The problem you face is the cost of moving the fuel to these fueling stations. (Not neccessarily the cost of the fuel itself.) Remember your fuel transports can't take fuel from the refuel site to be effecient. To get to a point Jump-3 out from the edge of the rift would require 3 Jump-2 tankers. One to deliver the fuel, one to fuel the tanker delivering the fuel one hex away from the point on the way in and one to refuel the tanker one hex from the refuel point on the way back. YOu would need 12 tankers to get you 4 hexes out with jump-2 tankers. (YIKES!) Jump-3 tankers set up 4 hexes out with three ships, but your load is definitely going down. It is a logistical nightmare. For comercial viability remember that you have no markets in the rift besides the refueling stations. smile.gif
Most merchant traffic is short haul. Long haul merchant traffic is not generally economical. So the economic viability for a commercial route across a rift, especially with the costs of keeping fuel there, is nil.
Well, there are some damn great answers in here. What I think I was looking for, was a way to not just use one ship, but set up a series of ships and stations/fuel outposts, so that you can indefinitely run a rift using Jump-1 ships (i.e. not having to go around using Corridor sector). I would think that a 1000+ year old government would find it cheaper in the long run to build something like this. 15-30 parsecs crossed is a whole lot cheaper in fuel than a 60-90+ parsec journey, I would think. Just one Fueling Station Run across the rift in Reft sector would cut down on a lot of fuel burned, and Vargr raids most likely. Nobody ever said those Imperials were smart. But how long would something like this take to set up? If you are only covering maybe 30 parsecs, you could conceivably have something up and running within a year. Now if you were a private company, and partnered with the military so they could get their fuel at a discount or such, maybe in return for "protection"... How would you go about this?
Scout The problem you face is the cost of moving the fuel to these fueling stations. (Not neccessarily the cost of the fuel itself.) Remember your fuel transports can't take fuel from the refuel site to be effecient. To get to a point Jump-3 out from the edge of the rift would require 3 Jump-2 tankers. One to deliver the fuel, one to fuel the tanker delivering the fuel one hex away from the point on the way in and one to refuel the tanker one hex from the refuel point on the way back. YOu would need 12 tankers to get you 4 hexes out with jump-2 tankers. (YIKES!) Jump-3 tankers set up 4 hexes out with three ships, but your load is definitely going down. It is a logistical nightmare. For comercial viability remember that you have no markets in the rift besides the refueling stations. smile.gif
Most merchant traffic is short haul. Long haul merchant traffic is not generally economical. So the economic viability for a commercial route across a rift, especially with the costs of keeping fuel there, is nil.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét