opensent
February 18th, 2005, 05:03 AM
Hypothetical question:
What happens to the mortgage on a Starship if it is destroyed prior to the last payment?
Is the Master/Owner now responsible for 100-300K payments every month without any means to generate this amount? Or does the bank have some sort of insurance built into the payment scheme?
What happens if your players were a bit over zealous and managed to effectively destroy their ship without getting themselves killed off in the process.
What happens to the mortgage on a Starship if it is destroyed prior to the last payment?
Is the Master/Owner now responsible for 100-300K payments every month without any means to generate this amount? Or does the bank have some sort of insurance built into the payment scheme?
What happens if your players were a bit over zealous and managed to effectively destroy their ship without getting themselves killed off in the process.
Jame
February 18th, 2005, 08:30 AM
And you should know, being one of the authors of GT:FT? graemlins/file_23.gif
kaladorn
February 18th, 2005, 11:54 AM
Also, the nature of the 'loss' would have a lot to do with any ability of PCs to recoup their loss (and the bank may get theirs under any case, but their insurer may come after the PCs for some civil actions if the PCs did something stupid or criminal to cause the loss).
And even if the insurer pays off to the PCs, they mad to so...v...e...r..y...s..l...o...w...l...y....
But that's good info to have, thanks Citizen Thrash.
And even if the insurer pays off to the PCs, they mad to so...v...e...r..y...s..l...o...w...l...y....
But that's good info to have, thanks Citizen Thrash.
Anthony
February 18th, 2005, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by Furtive Envoy:
Hypothetical question:
What happens to the mortgage on a Starship if it is destroyed prior to the last payment?
It still exists, but since the consequences of defaulting on a loan secured with a starship are having the starship repossessed, this is not exactly a big problem.
What happens if your players were a bit over zealous and managed to effectively destroy their ship without getting themselves killed off in the process. Depends on the terms of the loan. Given your description, it sounds like the PCs were taking stupid risks, which probably triggers some sort of penalty clause which allows the bank to sue them for damages.
The truth is, given typical PC behavior, no bank would loan them the money to buy a starship, unless the loan was secured by property other than the starship, or the loan was much shorter duration at much higher interest.
Hypothetical question:
What happens to the mortgage on a Starship if it is destroyed prior to the last payment?
It still exists, but since the consequences of defaulting on a loan secured with a starship are having the starship repossessed, this is not exactly a big problem.
What happens if your players were a bit over zealous and managed to effectively destroy their ship without getting themselves killed off in the process. Depends on the terms of the loan. Given your description, it sounds like the PCs were taking stupid risks, which probably triggers some sort of penalty clause which allows the bank to sue them for damages.
The truth is, given typical PC behavior, no bank would loan them the money to buy a starship, unless the loan was secured by property other than the starship, or the loan was much shorter duration at much higher interest.
kaladorn
February 18th, 2005, 04:16 PM
Let me take an alternate PoV: Characters with a Merchant or Noble background might have little trouble getting a loan. You'd think SEHs etc. would make you a good loan candidate, but not so much. Yes, they speak to your ethics, but not so much to your ability to manage money and a business. Bureaucrats probably have a good chance of getting a loan due to knowing how to work any admin-based system. Similarly, Diplomats may have connections. Scouts? Good luck. Go find an IISS detached-duty Type-S. Rogues? Possibly, but it takes some imagining. Hunters? Probably not. Cops? Probably not. Other military? Probably not. Scientists? Maybe, depending on their corporate ties or influence. It goes on.
But there are those, like Nobles, for whom a loan could be secured by holdings. Essentially, a bank is going to be concerned about the ship disappearing off of its radar. A Sector wide Imperial Bank might be more tolerant of itinerant Travellers than a local bank will be, unless the people have strong family and real estate ties to the local world.
But there are those, like Nobles, for whom a loan could be secured by holdings. Essentially, a bank is going to be concerned about the ship disappearing off of its radar. A Sector wide Imperial Bank might be more tolerant of itinerant Travellers than a local bank will be, unless the people have strong family and real estate ties to the local world.
Anthony
February 18th, 2005, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by kaladorn:
Let me take an alternate PoV: Characters with a Merchant or Noble background might have little trouble getting a loan.Anyone with assets which can be used to back a loan won't have too much trouble (so any noble with money won't have trouble). Characters with a merchant background will have an advantage, and if they put together a sane business plan shouldn't have much trouble -- but 'sane business plan' is kinda boring for PCs, and 40 year loans are unlikely for the types of business plans that are interesting (you're looking for venture capital, not a regular secured loan).
Let me take an alternate PoV: Characters with a Merchant or Noble background might have little trouble getting a loan.Anyone with assets which can be used to back a loan won't have too much trouble (so any noble with money won't have trouble). Characters with a merchant background will have an advantage, and if they put together a sane business plan shouldn't have much trouble -- but 'sane business plan' is kinda boring for PCs, and 40 year loans are unlikely for the types of business plans that are interesting (you're looking for venture capital, not a regular secured loan).
Fritz_Brown
February 19th, 2005, 05:34 PM
Ummm, kaladorn, why would a bank lend money to an SEH holder? As was discussed on the medals for Mercs thread, people like that take risks. And, if there is one kind of person a bank doesn't want to lend money to, it's a big risk-taker! smile.gif
lightsenshi
February 19th, 2005, 06:09 PM
Odds are that an SEH holder isn't necessarily a high risk taker.
As for the original question, I would assume that the lender (at least a legal lender) would have insurance to cover this sort of thing. But then again, I would expect insurance companies to keep bounty hunters on staff for these sort of "risk reduction" models. smile.gif
Originally posted by Fritz88:
Ummm, kaladorn, why would a bank lend money to an SEH holder? As was discussed on the medals for Mercs thread, people like that take risks. And, if there is one kind of person a bank doesn't want to lend money to, it's a big risk-taker! smile.gif
As for the original question, I would assume that the lender (at least a legal lender) would have insurance to cover this sort of thing. But then again, I would expect insurance companies to keep bounty hunters on staff for these sort of "risk reduction" models. smile.gif
Originally posted by Fritz88:
Ummm, kaladorn, why would a bank lend money to an SEH holder? As was discussed on the medals for Mercs thread, people like that take risks. And, if there is one kind of person a bank doesn't want to lend money to, it's a big risk-taker! smile.gif
kaladorn
February 19th, 2005, 11:08 PM
Why would a bank loan money to an SEH holder? I think I said they probably wouldn't, if he was just a military veteran. Why would the question come up? He or she might have decided to try their hand at merchantry after retiring from the service.
The thing to keep in mind is the Imperium is big, space is big and slow, and a crew that buggers off with a ship can go quite a distance before it is noticed and far enough and no one will catch up anytime soon. Banks have to watch for this kind of thing in setting up contingencies. This goes double for planetbound institutions who are probably less likely to fund interstellar traders than larger pan-Sector or pan-Domain financial institutions (who have reach and are thus less worried about someone outrunning them).
The thing to keep in mind is the Imperium is big, space is big and slow, and a crew that buggers off with a ship can go quite a distance before it is noticed and far enough and no one will catch up anytime soon. Banks have to watch for this kind of thing in setting up contingencies. This goes double for planetbound institutions who are probably less likely to fund interstellar traders than larger pan-Sector or pan-Domain financial institutions (who have reach and are thus less worried about someone outrunning them).
aramis
February 21st, 2005, 02:10 AM
The banks may not be the ones actually backing the loans.
It may be much like federally guaranteed student loans: THe bank is never actually out the principle, as even if the loan defaults, the bank is guaranteed the repayment by the government.
In fact, I suspect (no offense to thrash & blue) that banking, and private enterprise as well, really ARE NOT the driving force of interstellar commerce; I suspect the 3I tends to take a far more managed approach. Why do you not default on a loan? Cause that Standard Imperial Transponder screams "I'm Stolen" if not reset for 3 months, and that the navy actuaLly monitors for that.
I doubt those loans ever even see a bank; they are not private investment driven, either... the only logical source is a government subsidy.
So, I suspect that, assuming no malfeasance on the part of the ship's owner nor crew, they either get to walk, or get a fresh 40 year with no further down needed (depending upon local IMOT's assessment of the usefulness of the ship in procuring further local trade.
It may be much like federally guaranteed student loans: THe bank is never actually out the principle, as even if the loan defaults, the bank is guaranteed the repayment by the government.
In fact, I suspect (no offense to thrash & blue) that banking, and private enterprise as well, really ARE NOT the driving force of interstellar commerce; I suspect the 3I tends to take a far more managed approach. Why do you not default on a loan? Cause that Standard Imperial Transponder screams "I'm Stolen" if not reset for 3 months, and that the navy actuaLly monitors for that.
I doubt those loans ever even see a bank; they are not private investment driven, either... the only logical source is a government subsidy.
So, I suspect that, assuming no malfeasance on the part of the ship's owner nor crew, they either get to walk, or get a fresh 40 year with no further down needed (depending upon local IMOT's assessment of the usefulness of the ship in procuring further local trade.
Anthony
February 21st, 2005, 02:14 AM
Originally posted by Aramis:
The banks may not be the ones actually backing the loans.
It may be much like federally guaranteed student loans: THe bank is never actually out the principle, as even if the loan defaults, the bank is guaranteed the repayment by the government.Which opens up the question of why the government would want to do this. It also implies a much more active and intrusive Imperial government than most of canon implies.
The banks may not be the ones actually backing the loans.
It may be much like federally guaranteed student loans: THe bank is never actually out the principle, as even if the loan defaults, the bank is guaranteed the repayment by the government.Which opens up the question of why the government would want to do this. It also implies a much more active and intrusive Imperial government than most of canon implies.
kaladorn
February 21st, 2005, 12:01 PM
Yeah, I have to agree. My Imperium isn't that involved - Canon seems to be more 'live and leave alone' from their PoV.
Also, the transponder thing is not enough. In 3 months, your ship can have been chopshopped. Sure, I can't sell the entire ship, but get it to a bootleg yard and some pirate ship now has a new manouver drive, a smuggler has a new jump drive, and a few less picky merchant captains have new computer and avionics hardware and the weapons will be sold to a less-than-scrupulous planetary navy not asking too many questions. Net result: The ship is gone, chopped up, etc.
The Imperium (to my mind) doesn't have time to sweat the small stuff. So it has to let others do that, and this is the role that large megacorps fill. Local banks may have relations with them, and *THAT* may be the vehicle of insuring loans by small banks to 'itinerant' spacecrew.
Also, the transponder thing is not enough. In 3 months, your ship can have been chopshopped. Sure, I can't sell the entire ship, but get it to a bootleg yard and some pirate ship now has a new manouver drive, a smuggler has a new jump drive, and a few less picky merchant captains have new computer and avionics hardware and the weapons will be sold to a less-than-scrupulous planetary navy not asking too many questions. Net result: The ship is gone, chopped up, etc.
The Imperium (to my mind) doesn't have time to sweat the small stuff. So it has to let others do that, and this is the role that large megacorps fill. Local banks may have relations with them, and *THAT* may be the vehicle of insuring loans by small banks to 'itinerant' spacecrew.
JAFARR
February 21st, 2005, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by Aramis:
The banks may not be the ones actually backing the loans.
Look at the auto makers of today: They all have their own finance divisions. I would assume that within the 3I at least, most shipsyards are owned by the megacorps who also have finance divisions.
Afterall, why let a bank make the profit when you can do add more to your coffers by financing ships yourself?
While the book specifically mentions government sibsidities, other grganizations might well supply ships to qualified persons. For example a major university or a research company may provide a lab ship, while a shipping line may provide a patrol ship of some type to protect it's interests in a back water area. In such cases, I would think the character(s)would have to answer to them in the case of losing their ship.
The banks may not be the ones actually backing the loans.
Look at the auto makers of today: They all have their own finance divisions. I would assume that within the 3I at least, most shipsyards are owned by the megacorps who also have finance divisions.
Afterall, why let a bank make the profit when you can do add more to your coffers by financing ships yourself?
While the book specifically mentions government sibsidities, other grganizations might well supply ships to qualified persons. For example a major university or a research company may provide a lab ship, while a shipping line may provide a patrol ship of some type to protect it's interests in a back water area. In such cases, I would think the character(s)would have to answer to them in the case of losing their ship.
Anthony
February 21st, 2005, 09:40 PM
Lots of people other than banks might finance ships. However, all likely financiers of merchant ships will be interested in having their investment paid back, so it doesn't really matter if the loan giver is a bank or someone else.
Elliot
February 22nd, 2005, 05:10 PM
Lets not forget that most merchant ships are J1 or J2 - that kind of locks them into mains or slightly larger areas of space, but not trans rift stuff in a hurry.
A subsector/quadrant/sector based mortgagee that is allowed to program its code into the transponder is not going to be too worried about skipping with regard to J1 and J2 ships. I can imagine that interest on J1 ships is less than on J2, which is less than on J3 etc etc as the security is less risky - a bank can pay J4 x- boats to travel worlds with news of repos and that will effectively beat all J1 and J2 ships in terms of enforcement.
A subsector/quadrant/sector based mortgagee that is allowed to program its code into the transponder is not going to be too worried about skipping with regard to J1 and J2 ships. I can imagine that interest on J1 ships is less than on J2, which is less than on J3 etc etc as the security is less risky - a bank can pay J4 x- boats to travel worlds with news of repos and that will effectively beat all J1 and J2 ships in terms of enforcement.
kaladorn
February 22nd, 2005, 06:38 PM
I come back to the point about chopshops. It doesn't matter if you can outrun the crew if the ship can be chopshopped quickly. Or re-transpondered and given bogus registry. Thus all your fanciness with transponders and fast x-boat messages isn't that significant. The only thing those head off are the crew that wants to steal it, can't hack the transponder or get a bootleg one, and that want to continue to operate the ship as a going concern.
Really, the other issues would probably account for a fair part of the risk so they'd want better mechanisms than that.
I can think of several technological deadman solutions, but these aren't infallible and can be beaten. I can think of several steps banks can take in terms of who they choose to loan credit to and what kind of reciprocal agreements they have with larger agencies. I mean, you wouldn't steal a ship very readily if you knew Insterstellarms mercs were going to be hunting you until the stars grow cold and go out. They have reach, they have a willingness to crack heads and kneecaps and they'll get you.... eventually.
But no system is perfect. But it should be designed to be tough to get around (like deadman switches, transponders, etc) technically and augmented by sound business practices and agreements in place with larger outside agencies. This combination gives you a multipronged attack on the various forms of piracy and barratry.
Really, the other issues would probably account for a fair part of the risk so they'd want better mechanisms than that.
I can think of several technological deadman solutions, but these aren't infallible and can be beaten. I can think of several steps banks can take in terms of who they choose to loan credit to and what kind of reciprocal agreements they have with larger agencies. I mean, you wouldn't steal a ship very readily if you knew Insterstellarms mercs were going to be hunting you until the stars grow cold and go out. They have reach, they have a willingness to crack heads and kneecaps and they'll get you.... eventually.
But no system is perfect. But it should be designed to be tough to get around (like deadman switches, transponders, etc) technically and augmented by sound business practices and agreements in place with larger outside agencies. This combination gives you a multipronged attack on the various forms of piracy and barratry.
Elliot
February 23rd, 2005, 04:23 AM
The thing about mains is that J4 x boats get the message to the repo team up the main alot sooner than a Free Trader can. So assuming fuel, maintenance and life support is a necessity for the crew (and it is in canon) unless there are chopshops in every corner of Imperial space (something I rather doubt given the heavy handedness of Imperial and corporate interests) the average Free Trader has no where to go if it decides to skip. An A1 simply does not have the range in its puny j drives.
IIRC the Navy fires on ships with corrupted transponders (which are in effect intelligent lifeforms - Deyo chips) so chopshops would have to be pretty damn good to be in business.
Of course for the criminally minded player the chopshop at the end of the main is a thing a legend and adventure.
IIRC the Navy fires on ships with corrupted transponders (which are in effect intelligent lifeforms - Deyo chips) so chopshops would have to be pretty damn good to be in business.
Of course for the criminally minded player the chopshop at the end of the main is a thing a legend and adventure.
Anthony
February 23rd, 2005, 12:14 PM
Why would the Navy fire on ships with failed transponders automatically? They have no precognitive awareness of Virus. In any case, chopshops take ships apart for materials, so it doesn't matter what the transponder might say.
This, of coures, assumes that the Deyo transponders actually exist, work, and are universally installed, which is probably not true (since it makes no sense) outside of a MT campaign. It's specifically not true for a CT campaign, since the Cymbeline chips were only introduced in one of the classic adventures, at which point they didn't have applications.
There are a lot of planets in the 3I with D and E class starports, which see a mail ship every six months. It's not that hard to hide if you really want to.
This, of coures, assumes that the Deyo transponders actually exist, work, and are universally installed, which is probably not true (since it makes no sense) outside of a MT campaign. It's specifically not true for a CT campaign, since the Cymbeline chips were only introduced in one of the classic adventures, at which point they didn't have applications.
There are a lot of planets in the 3I with D and E class starports, which see a mail ship every six months. It's not that hard to hide if you really want to.
mike wightman
February 23rd, 2005, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Anthony:
This, of coures, assumes that the Deyo transponders actually exist, work, and are universally installed, which is probably not true (since it makes no sense) outside of a MT campaign. It's specifically not true for a CT campaign, since the Cymbeline chips were only introduced in one of the classic adventures, at which point they didn't have applications.
TNE effectively retconned the deyo transponder into the CT OTU.
According to Survival Margin the Imperials have known about the Cymbeline chips for quite a while now, the first deyo transponders being tested at round about the time the Kinunir disappeared ;)
This, of coures, assumes that the Deyo transponders actually exist, work, and are universally installed, which is probably not true (since it makes no sense) outside of a MT campaign. It's specifically not true for a CT campaign, since the Cymbeline chips were only introduced in one of the classic adventures, at which point they didn't have applications.
TNE effectively retconned the deyo transponder into the CT OTU.
According to Survival Margin the Imperials have known about the Cymbeline chips for quite a while now, the first deyo transponders being tested at round about the time the Kinunir disappeared ;)
Elliot
February 24th, 2005, 05:19 AM
Look at pages 69-71 of Survivial Margin = Deyo chips installed into all ships transponder systems from 1088 to 1100 as routine maintenance under the 12th Standard Data Systems Law of 1088.
This passage comes up - 'the transponder of a stolen starship will not attempt to conceal the fact that it is a stolen vessel, should the data at its disposal confirm that fact'
Likewise a chopshoped craft will have a different transponder in it which will be recognisable to Starport authorities when the thing squwarks.
It is my understanding from LKW's comments on Virus in G:T that this is true of the GURPS universe as well as in the official TU.
As to hiding on a E or D starport world - well that rather defeats the object of skipping on the mortgage repayment - electronic information on stolen ships planted in Starport computer systems in a main does not get forgotten becuase someone has waited things out for 6 months on a backwater.
This passage comes up - 'the transponder of a stolen starship will not attempt to conceal the fact that it is a stolen vessel, should the data at its disposal confirm that fact'
Likewise a chopshoped craft will have a different transponder in it which will be recognisable to Starport authorities when the thing squwarks.
It is my understanding from LKW's comments on Virus in G:T that this is true of the GURPS universe as well as in the official TU.
As to hiding on a E or D starport world - well that rather defeats the object of skipping on the mortgage repayment - electronic information on stolen ships planted in Starport computer systems in a main does not get forgotten becuase someone has waited things out for 6 months on a backwater.
kaladorn
February 24th, 2005, 04:50 PM
1) I just can't see an uncrackable technology here. I work in computers. It stretches the credibility for me more than Jump Drive.
2) I chopshop your ship. The stolen parts get refitted into a pre-existing ship with a legitemate transponder. The transponder won't do any screaming because it has no way to know that the jump drive is not a legitemate purchase.
3) The chip will only scream (if we accept the premise of these transponders as the deyo model) if it knows something to prove that their is a theft to report. Surely one can (as a smart criminal) envision apparently legitemate ways to make these things report everything is fine.
4) If they are living things, they would have some sort of self-preservation drive. Pointing out to the transponder that screaming is followed by being melted by an FGMP might convince it that its best interests lie in NOT reporting things outside the ordinary.
2) I chopshop your ship. The stolen parts get refitted into a pre-existing ship with a legitemate transponder. The transponder won't do any screaming because it has no way to know that the jump drive is not a legitemate purchase.
3) The chip will only scream (if we accept the premise of these transponders as the deyo model) if it knows something to prove that their is a theft to report. Surely one can (as a smart criminal) envision apparently legitemate ways to make these things report everything is fine.
4) If they are living things, they would have some sort of self-preservation drive. Pointing out to the transponder that screaming is followed by being melted by an FGMP might convince it that its best interests lie in NOT reporting things outside the ordinary.
far-trader
February 24th, 2005, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by kaladorn:
...
4) If they are living things, they would have some sort of self-preservation drive. Pointing out to the transponder that screaming is followed by being melted by an FGMP might convince it that its best interests lie in NOT reporting things outside the ordinary. If the AI is that smart (and TNE suggests it is eventually), and as tied into systems as TNE suggested, well, threats are a dumb move sophont graemlins/file_22.gif You gotta sleep sometime, the AI doesn't graemlins/file_23.gif
...
4) If they are living things, they would have some sort of self-preservation drive. Pointing out to the transponder that screaming is followed by being melted by an FGMP might convince it that its best interests lie in NOT reporting things outside the ordinary. If the AI is that smart (and TNE suggests it is eventually), and as tied into systems as TNE suggested, well, threats are a dumb move sophont graemlins/file_22.gif You gotta sleep sometime, the AI doesn't graemlins/file_23.gif
far-trader
February 24th, 2005, 05:19 PM
As for stolen parts on legit otherwise ships, that should be caught at your next annual recertification. Barring incompetance on the inspectors part, or bribery ;)
Elliot
February 24th, 2005, 05:25 PM
My Lord Kaladorn, I would say that your submissions to the moot are compelling - but the chopshops you are referring to must be fairly sophisticated and thus rare and not hanging about on every startown corner - hence mortgagees can have confidence that their money is not disappearing with the iridium grid.
You work in computers - I work in the property law - From that angle there is a simple proposition: no one is going to lend on moveable security unless that security is secure - mortgages on ships are canon - the Deyo transponder system and its resistance to tampering is a good canonical answer to this problem.
As to the FGMP conundrum: remeber that no one knew the Deyo was AI - hence virus took hold so easily!
You work in computers - I work in the property law - From that angle there is a simple proposition: no one is going to lend on moveable security unless that security is secure - mortgages on ships are canon - the Deyo transponder system and its resistance to tampering is a good canonical answer to this problem.
As to the FGMP conundrum: remeber that no one knew the Deyo was AI - hence virus took hold so easily!
kaladorn
March 20th, 2005, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by far-trader:
As for stolen parts on legit otherwise ships, that should be caught at your next annual recertification. Barring incompetance on the inspectors part, or bribery ;) Depends where you get inspected and what your XO's Bribery level is, as you say. Or the technoflimflammery level of your engineer smile.gif
I agree with the comment made about property law. Or more correctly, let me put it into an insurance man's lingo, since Dad worked in that line of work for a bit of time.
The actuarial tables will be setup such that fees charged will reflect losses + profit. If losses go up, so do fees (in this case, interest on loans).
Things I can see working, since I don't think transponders are the foolproof answer:
Imperial Ministry of Justice - sharing data between worlds on skipped ships. Sure, if you run and keep running, you can outrun the data. But if you ever turn back or stop, it'll catch up eventually. Justice isn't fast sometimes, but it works eventually.
Skip Tracers - I can see a thriving business in skip tracing. Good high tech recovery teams with warrants to operate as recovery agents in Imperial territory and with a mid-jump starship (better than most freighters or other ships likely to be hijacked). I mean, if a ship insurer has to pay 20% of ships value to get it back, that's still a deal compared with 100% smile.gif
Software Safegaurds - a Bank could demand you run with 'LockWare' installed that locks up the controls at some predetermined time if you haven't visited a branch, made a payment, and got an updated security code. It also locks up instantly if it catches you cracking it. Very high computer level needed to crack.
Lobbying for Ruthless Punishments for 'Skips' - If every time one of these guys is brought back, he gets life imprisonment on some unpleasant rock, that's a bit of a deterrent. And caught skips would be publicized just to help convey the point that 'you ain't gettin' away from the banks'.
Ever notice how in real life, some financial crimes can really get the book thrown at you? (Now, not all of them, but particular ones that annoy the powerful and rich?)
Transponder - It isn't be all end all. They can probably be tampered with, fooled, or reasoned with (hey, a complicit transponder... interesting idea!). They can obviously be threatened with being starved of power (food). They may even be able to be negotiated with. Who knows, depending on the reasons, they may even want to help. But one way or another, they are *a* line of defence.
I just don't see them as the be all end all.
Many ships could be stripped of easily-removable stuff fast and left drifting or sent into a sun or gas giant to get rid of them. Things like vacc suits, the captains safe, computer programs, cargo, fuel, easily removable circuit modules, small craft, perhaps even weapons and the like.
Other things like the jump drive, the manouver drive, masking systems, etc. might take more to strip off and require a black yard. Sure these will be rare, but who would know about them? The kind of folks who need them - pirates, scum, etc. In fact, an illicit privateering or piracy campaign may be underwritten by a megacorp yard or a planetary navy yard if they're 1) running a game their higher ups don't know about or 2) running a game their higher ups have ordered for some political end (knowing the risks if they get caught). Think of this as an economic version of the kind of operation that Mr. Ritter organized in the Tom Clancy movie with Harrison Ford and Willem Dafoe (Clear and Present Danger?).
So, the answer is: Yes, banks will set rates that reflect losses. The standard rates in the book probably reflect 'secure' sector rates (like the more civilized parts of the marches during the stable 3I). As times change, or as you get further out, banks will want higher and higher rates and in some situations, will not undertake the risk deeming there to be no sufficient point of return that they can count on (the rates are so high people always skip or that they'd bankrupt any merchant venture sadled with them).
Banks may also consider things like giving a discounted rate for ships willing to carry one or more of their agents as crew. I mean, a bank having to pay a salary to the agent as well as him getting a crew salary makes it good for him to stay, and he probably has a family somewhere the bank can get at, so this tends to insure his loyalty.
Also, the bank may give high initial rates, and give reductions for captains who make a year, two years, five years, ten years, or twenty years worth of payments. That is to say, you become less of a risk once you establish a history of payment and success.
There are some other thoughts.
As for stolen parts on legit otherwise ships, that should be caught at your next annual recertification. Barring incompetance on the inspectors part, or bribery ;) Depends where you get inspected and what your XO's Bribery level is, as you say. Or the technoflimflammery level of your engineer smile.gif
I agree with the comment made about property law. Or more correctly, let me put it into an insurance man's lingo, since Dad worked in that line of work for a bit of time.
The actuarial tables will be setup such that fees charged will reflect losses + profit. If losses go up, so do fees (in this case, interest on loans).
Things I can see working, since I don't think transponders are the foolproof answer:
Imperial Ministry of Justice - sharing data between worlds on skipped ships. Sure, if you run and keep running, you can outrun the data. But if you ever turn back or stop, it'll catch up eventually. Justice isn't fast sometimes, but it works eventually.
Skip Tracers - I can see a thriving business in skip tracing. Good high tech recovery teams with warrants to operate as recovery agents in Imperial territory and with a mid-jump starship (better than most freighters or other ships likely to be hijacked). I mean, if a ship insurer has to pay 20% of ships value to get it back, that's still a deal compared with 100% smile.gif
Software Safegaurds - a Bank could demand you run with 'LockWare' installed that locks up the controls at some predetermined time if you haven't visited a branch, made a payment, and got an updated security code. It also locks up instantly if it catches you cracking it. Very high computer level needed to crack.
Lobbying for Ruthless Punishments for 'Skips' - If every time one of these guys is brought back, he gets life imprisonment on some unpleasant rock, that's a bit of a deterrent. And caught skips would be publicized just to help convey the point that 'you ain't gettin' away from the banks'.
Ever notice how in real life, some financial crimes can really get the book thrown at you? (Now, not all of them, but particular ones that annoy the powerful and rich?)
Transponder - It isn't be all end all. They can probably be tampered with, fooled, or reasoned with (hey, a complicit transponder... interesting idea!). They can obviously be threatened with being starved of power (food). They may even be able to be negotiated with. Who knows, depending on the reasons, they may even want to help. But one way or another, they are *a* line of defence.
I just don't see them as the be all end all.
Many ships could be stripped of easily-removable stuff fast and left drifting or sent into a sun or gas giant to get rid of them. Things like vacc suits, the captains safe, computer programs, cargo, fuel, easily removable circuit modules, small craft, perhaps even weapons and the like.
Other things like the jump drive, the manouver drive, masking systems, etc. might take more to strip off and require a black yard. Sure these will be rare, but who would know about them? The kind of folks who need them - pirates, scum, etc. In fact, an illicit privateering or piracy campaign may be underwritten by a megacorp yard or a planetary navy yard if they're 1) running a game their higher ups don't know about or 2) running a game their higher ups have ordered for some political end (knowing the risks if they get caught). Think of this as an economic version of the kind of operation that Mr. Ritter organized in the Tom Clancy movie with Harrison Ford and Willem Dafoe (Clear and Present Danger?).
So, the answer is: Yes, banks will set rates that reflect losses. The standard rates in the book probably reflect 'secure' sector rates (like the more civilized parts of the marches during the stable 3I). As times change, or as you get further out, banks will want higher and higher rates and in some situations, will not undertake the risk deeming there to be no sufficient point of return that they can count on (the rates are so high people always skip or that they'd bankrupt any merchant venture sadled with them).
Banks may also consider things like giving a discounted rate for ships willing to carry one or more of their agents as crew. I mean, a bank having to pay a salary to the agent as well as him getting a crew salary makes it good for him to stay, and he probably has a family somewhere the bank can get at, so this tends to insure his loyalty.
Also, the bank may give high initial rates, and give reductions for captains who make a year, two years, five years, ten years, or twenty years worth of payments. That is to say, you become less of a risk once you establish a history of payment and success.
There are some other thoughts.
roygbiv
March 21st, 2005, 09:30 PM
This is a bit off topic but does anyone allow ships older than 40 years old to operate in their TU? To me it seems as if that's the only way "average" party of PCs can get ahold of one. I can see 80 or 100-year old free traders on the market for 3-5 MCr which is much more in reach. Of course this opens up the whole range of maintenance headaches, trouble with Imperial inspections, endless plot possibilities inherent due to the constant threat of malfunctions...
It's always seemed a bit odd to me that starships only lasted 40 years. In fact, I'll bet outlying regions such as Gateway Domain are chock full of flying rustbuckets which had been "decommissioned" by megacorps and even the IISS.
It's always seemed a bit odd to me that starships only lasted 40 years. In fact, I'll bet outlying regions such as Gateway Domain are chock full of flying rustbuckets which had been "decommissioned" by megacorps and even the IISS.
RainOfSteel
March 22nd, 2005, 01:25 AM
Originally posted by roygbiv:
This is a bit off topic but does anyone allow ships older than 40 years old to operate in their TU? Oh, my, yes. smile.gif
There are lots of old ships floating around MTU. I have ship-graveyards, both land based and orbital based, that are similar to todays car junkyards and aircraft graveyards. Frequently, there are "used starship" lots attached to these, and nearby there are "monster starship" builders souping up old starships in their own private yards. Etc., ad infinitum.
It's possible to walk into a used starship lot on some worlds and pick up a 100 year old Type-S for 5 MCr (no weapons, turrent, or air/raft). Crikey, ain't she a bueat!
Of course, she may be a bit temperamental, but if you treat her just right, she'll luv ya!
This is a bit off topic but does anyone allow ships older than 40 years old to operate in their TU? Oh, my, yes. smile.gif
There are lots of old ships floating around MTU. I have ship-graveyards, both land based and orbital based, that are similar to todays car junkyards and aircraft graveyards. Frequently, there are "used starship" lots attached to these, and nearby there are "monster starship" builders souping up old starships in their own private yards. Etc., ad infinitum.
It's possible to walk into a used starship lot on some worlds and pick up a 100 year old Type-S for 5 MCr (no weapons, turrent, or air/raft). Crikey, ain't she a bueat!
Of course, she may be a bit temperamental, but if you treat her just right, she'll luv ya!
mike wightman
March 22nd, 2005, 01:55 AM
I've noticed while reading through the ship descriptions in CT Supplement 9: Fighting ships that several of the Imperial warships in that book are well over forty years old and still in service.
IMTU it isn't unusual to find ships well into their third mortgage. That's about one hundred years old.
IMTU it isn't unusual to find ships well into their third mortgage. That's about one hundred years old.
TheEngineer
March 22nd, 2005, 01:58 AM
Well, the just two major reason I could imagine, why older ships are removed from service:
- they represent a hazard for the spacefaring community
- the maintainance costs are greater than possible incomes
As long as annual maintainance is performed correctly I would let the ship run, and run, and run. But this would keep its value on a high level, too.
You might take a look at the TNE rules dealing with "wear values" malfunctions and maintainance of old stuff.
I could imagine that imperial SPAs puts badly maintainanced ships on a "black list", which prevents those to approach starports for trading or passanger transport. Perhaps really bad ships are forced out of service by law.
So old starships, perhaps in family property for generations, are peaclefully moving around IMTU, too smile.gif
Regards,
Mert
- they represent a hazard for the spacefaring community
- the maintainance costs are greater than possible incomes
As long as annual maintainance is performed correctly I would let the ship run, and run, and run. But this would keep its value on a high level, too.
You might take a look at the TNE rules dealing with "wear values" malfunctions and maintainance of old stuff.
I could imagine that imperial SPAs puts badly maintainanced ships on a "black list", which prevents those to approach starports for trading or passanger transport. Perhaps really bad ships are forced out of service by law.
So old starships, perhaps in family property for generations, are peaclefully moving around IMTU, too smile.gif
Regards,
Mert
TheEngineer
March 22nd, 2005, 01:59 AM
Well, the just two major reason I could imagine, why older ships are removed from service:
- they represent a hazard for the spacefaring community
- the maintainance costs are greater than possible incomes
As long as annual maintainance is performed correctly I would let the ship run, and run, and run. But this would keep its value on a high level, too.
You might take a look at the TNE rules dealing with "wear values" malfunctions and maintainance of old stuff.
I could imagine that imperial SPAs puts badly maintainanced ships on a "black list", which prevents those to approach starports for trading or passanger transport. Perhaps really bad ships are forced out of service by law.
So old starships, perhaps in family property for generations, are peacefully moving around IMTU, too smile.gif
Regards,
Mert
- they represent a hazard for the spacefaring community
- the maintainance costs are greater than possible incomes
As long as annual maintainance is performed correctly I would let the ship run, and run, and run. But this would keep its value on a high level, too.
You might take a look at the TNE rules dealing with "wear values" malfunctions and maintainance of old stuff.
I could imagine that imperial SPAs puts badly maintainanced ships on a "black list", which prevents those to approach starports for trading or passanger transport. Perhaps really bad ships are forced out of service by law.
So old starships, perhaps in family property for generations, are peacefully moving around IMTU, too smile.gif
Regards,
Mert
Straybow
March 22nd, 2005, 06:37 PM
Much of this is 20th century Earth-think. In Traveller these ships are built of substances far more durable than the ordinary steel of our ocean-going vessels. You really can have a centuries-old hull in good condition.
Maneuver and Jump engines aren't like reciprocating IC or turbine engines that suffer high wear in order to produce crude physical force effects (torque, thrust, etc). Parts that are subject to wear or various form of degradation get replaced on an annual basis. You really can have a centuries-old drive unit in good condition.
Maneuver and Jump engines aren't like reciprocating IC or turbine engines that suffer high wear in order to produce crude physical force effects (torque, thrust, etc). Parts that are subject to wear or various form of degradation get replaced on an annual basis. You really can have a centuries-old drive unit in good condition.
flykiller
March 22nd, 2005, 07:26 PM
You really can have a centuries-old hull in good condition ... You really can have a centuries-old drive unit in good condition.recent arguments have demonstrated that imperial finances are sufficient to purchase huge fleets of naval vessels. if one factors in this consideration then the number of vessels in the imperial navy becomes quite large.
RainOfSteel
March 22nd, 2005, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by Straybow:
Much of this is 20th century Earth-think. [...] You really can have a centuries-old hull in good condition.
[...] You really can have a centuries-old drive unit in good condition. Oh, I definitely agree.
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off.
Much of this is 20th century Earth-think. [...] You really can have a centuries-old hull in good condition.
[...] You really can have a centuries-old drive unit in good condition. Oh, I definitely agree.
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off.
veltyen
March 22nd, 2005, 09:24 PM
I always assumed that the lifetime of a ship in good nick and maintenance was infinite. Much like the Ship of Theseus Paradox (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/S/Sh/Ship_of_Theseus.htm)
The forty year term I always undertook to represent the mean time until (Piracy/Misjump/Naval Weapons Accident/Lifetime of Owner) rather then based on any parts wear concept.
The forty year term I always undertook to represent the mean time until (Piracy/Misjump/Naval Weapons Accident/Lifetime of Owner) rather then based on any parts wear concept.
roygbiv
March 22nd, 2005, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Oh, I definitely agree.
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off. Well I see several ways around "breaking the system."
First, you can assert that the strong Vilani influence in the 3I is probably going to mean that starships are rotated out of active service after 40 years because "that's the way things are done!" and the Vilani loooove tradition. That the canonical 3I is fairly stagnant technologically and probably economically as well suggests that the Vilani conservatism still exerts a powerful influence. The Imperial tax structure may even make it almost mandatory for most fleets to capitalize their their ships over 40 years so you'd see entire fleets being rotated this way to satisfy the Ministry of Commerce's regulations for financing.
So what happens to these ships? I'm guessing that rather than being scrapped they're sold off to smaller subsidiaries and feeder lines.
Also think about the Navy and the IISS. When the Suleiman displaced the Iiken class Scout Courier, thousands of ships would have to have been disposed of. It stretches credulity to think that they were all scrapped: instead they'd be "gifted" to client states, colonial fleets, planetary defense forces and, while no self-respecting main liner from the Imperial core would touch such a vessel, on the fringes, (where T20 is set!), these ships are going to be irresistable. True, demand may keep costs slightly inflated, but the market is going to be flooded.
The only other alternatives I can contemplate are that the scrapyard industries are some of the biggest employers in Imperial space, given the number of ships which would be decommissioned on a 40-year basis, or the Imperium is full of mothballed ships. Think about it: there are probably a couple hundred thousand Suleimans in service. What happens when a better model comes along? With entire asteroid belts full of raw materials, resource recovery would not be a very profitable business so you either have entire rockball systems littered with mothballed ships, or, far more likely, these ships are distributed on the fringes of the Imperium. Extrapolate that to the number of IN logistics vessels (we already know what happens to warships) and you have thousands of old ships in circulation, or else there are entire systems devoted to mothballing them.
I should probably disclose that I use the Gurps ruleset and GT:Starships does place a theoretical maximum life of a GTL12/T20 TL15 military grade starship at 2000 years, assuming proper maintenance and overhauls.
The 40 year amortization plan may be de rigeur throughout the Imperial core sectors, but I guarantee you areas like Gateway are going to be chock full of ships who are enjoying a useful life at 80, 100, or even 120 years.
And I don't think this breaks the system because the people who will be buying these well-loved vessels will be the shiftless, PCs who are lusting after adventure. Make the purchase cost of an 80 year-old Type A in the 8-10MCr range and allow this to be amortized over 15 years, with a balloon payment for the balance due at 10 years (exactly how most modern ships are financed today) and you've put a ship within reach of a party of scruffy PC's.
Yes, they'll get hassled more ofen. Yes they're going to have to scrounge for parts or may even suffer a catastrophic failure because the evil GM needs a plot hook, but think of the possibilities. Instead of Adventures in Accurate Accounting, you've got a vehicle for the bunch of crazy, impulsive PCs and countless opportunities for role playing.
Oh, I definitely agree.
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off. Well I see several ways around "breaking the system."
First, you can assert that the strong Vilani influence in the 3I is probably going to mean that starships are rotated out of active service after 40 years because "that's the way things are done!" and the Vilani loooove tradition. That the canonical 3I is fairly stagnant technologically and probably economically as well suggests that the Vilani conservatism still exerts a powerful influence. The Imperial tax structure may even make it almost mandatory for most fleets to capitalize their their ships over 40 years so you'd see entire fleets being rotated this way to satisfy the Ministry of Commerce's regulations for financing.
So what happens to these ships? I'm guessing that rather than being scrapped they're sold off to smaller subsidiaries and feeder lines.
Also think about the Navy and the IISS. When the Suleiman displaced the Iiken class Scout Courier, thousands of ships would have to have been disposed of. It stretches credulity to think that they were all scrapped: instead they'd be "gifted" to client states, colonial fleets, planetary defense forces and, while no self-respecting main liner from the Imperial core would touch such a vessel, on the fringes, (where T20 is set!), these ships are going to be irresistable. True, demand may keep costs slightly inflated, but the market is going to be flooded.
The only other alternatives I can contemplate are that the scrapyard industries are some of the biggest employers in Imperial space, given the number of ships which would be decommissioned on a 40-year basis, or the Imperium is full of mothballed ships. Think about it: there are probably a couple hundred thousand Suleimans in service. What happens when a better model comes along? With entire asteroid belts full of raw materials, resource recovery would not be a very profitable business so you either have entire rockball systems littered with mothballed ships, or, far more likely, these ships are distributed on the fringes of the Imperium. Extrapolate that to the number of IN logistics vessels (we already know what happens to warships) and you have thousands of old ships in circulation, or else there are entire systems devoted to mothballing them.
I should probably disclose that I use the Gurps ruleset and GT:Starships does place a theoretical maximum life of a GTL12/T20 TL15 military grade starship at 2000 years, assuming proper maintenance and overhauls.
The 40 year amortization plan may be de rigeur throughout the Imperial core sectors, but I guarantee you areas like Gateway are going to be chock full of ships who are enjoying a useful life at 80, 100, or even 120 years.
And I don't think this breaks the system because the people who will be buying these well-loved vessels will be the shiftless, PCs who are lusting after adventure. Make the purchase cost of an 80 year-old Type A in the 8-10MCr range and allow this to be amortized over 15 years, with a balloon payment for the balance due at 10 years (exactly how most modern ships are financed today) and you've put a ship within reach of a party of scruffy PC's.
Yes, they'll get hassled more ofen. Yes they're going to have to scrounge for parts or may even suffer a catastrophic failure because the evil GM needs a plot hook, but think of the possibilities. Instead of Adventures in Accurate Accounting, you've got a vehicle for the bunch of crazy, impulsive PCs and countless opportunities for role playing.
mike wightman
March 23rd, 2005, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by flykiller:
recent arguments have demonstrated that imperial finances are sufficient to purchase huge fleets of naval vessels. if one factors in this consideration then the number of vessels in the imperial navy becomes quite large. I agree, there should be a lot more examples of TL14 ships upgraded with TL15 components.
recent arguments have demonstrated that imperial finances are sufficient to purchase huge fleets of naval vessels. if one factors in this consideration then the number of vessels in the imperial navy becomes quite large. I agree, there should be a lot more examples of TL14 ships upgraded with TL15 components.
mike wightman
March 23rd, 2005, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off. You might be onto something though.
A ship that's handed down through the family, but still with a 100 year mortgage to pay, could make it easier to get higher jump number ships into the hands of PCs without having to change any of the economics rules (apart from this one of course ;) ).
It's becoming more common here in the UK for home owners to take mortgages that will only be repaid fully by their children - isn't the same thing common in Japan as well?
Quite some time ago, I tried to formulate a system where starship mortgages were 80 years long, based on advanced hulls, etc. It seemed to break the rest of the system (and its non-canonicity didn't help), and so I left off. You might be onto something though.
A ship that's handed down through the family, but still with a 100 year mortgage to pay, could make it easier to get higher jump number ships into the hands of PCs without having to change any of the economics rules (apart from this one of course ;) ).
It's becoming more common here in the UK for home owners to take mortgages that will only be repaid fully by their children - isn't the same thing common in Japan as well?
RainOfSteel
March 23rd, 2005, 01:57 AM
One thing I didn't like about vanilla HG2 construction was that TL didn't seem to affect some systems. When it did affect them, sometimes it affected volume, and sometimes it affected price, and sometimes it provided better capability, but never in any consistent way.
For instance, hulls. Hulls don't even get a chart in CT:Book 5. Just a text entry on p. 21 & 22. TL has no impact, even though TL does have an impact on Armor.
This sort of thing frequently caused me to pull at my hair while wondering how it had all been put together.
In some cases, there was little point in going up a TL at all.
For instance, unless you need J-5, I can't see much reason to build TL-14 vessels at all. TL-14 is the orphan of the HG2 design sequence. Oh yes, meson spinal mounts do get some better guns at TL-14. Bay weapons get a little better. Fusion guns get a bump. But spinal mounts don't matter to civilian shipping, bay weapons can be yanked and new ones dropped in at the tip of hat, and fusion guns aren't used extensively (at least they don't appear too often in CT:Supplement 9: Fighting Ships; and frankly, I'm not impressed with them as a weapons system). That is why, overall, those don't amount to "much" in my book. I guess the IN would have been hot to get it's hands on the new spinal mounts when TL-14 first arrived, but does that one factor really influence the entire spectrum of decision making that surrounds ship-building? I don't think so.
An upgrade from a TL-14 to a TL-15 would look more like, IMO, an upgrade from TL-13 to TL-15, in many respects.
EDIT--Many--Shortly after initial posts.
For instance, hulls. Hulls don't even get a chart in CT:Book 5. Just a text entry on p. 21 & 22. TL has no impact, even though TL does have an impact on Armor.
This sort of thing frequently caused me to pull at my hair while wondering how it had all been put together.
In some cases, there was little point in going up a TL at all.
For instance, unless you need J-5, I can't see much reason to build TL-14 vessels at all. TL-14 is the orphan of the HG2 design sequence. Oh yes, meson spinal mounts do get some better guns at TL-14. Bay weapons get a little better. Fusion guns get a bump. But spinal mounts don't matter to civilian shipping, bay weapons can be yanked and new ones dropped in at the tip of hat, and fusion guns aren't used extensively (at least they don't appear too often in CT:Supplement 9: Fighting Ships; and frankly, I'm not impressed with them as a weapons system). That is why, overall, those don't amount to "much" in my book. I guess the IN would have been hot to get it's hands on the new spinal mounts when TL-14 first arrived, but does that one factor really influence the entire spectrum of decision making that surrounds ship-building? I don't think so.
An upgrade from a TL-14 to a TL-15 would look more like, IMO, an upgrade from TL-13 to TL-15, in many respects.
EDIT--Many--Shortly after initial posts.
RainOfSteel
March 23rd, 2005, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by roygbiv:
Make the purchase cost of an 80 year-old Type A in the 8-10MCr range and allow this to be amortized over 15 years, with a balloon payment for the balance due at 10 years (exactly how most modern ships are financed today) and you've put a ship within reach of a party of scruffy PC's.
Could you provide a more detailed example (including numbers and lots of connect-the-dots examples) of how that works?
Make the purchase cost of an 80 year-old Type A in the 8-10MCr range and allow this to be amortized over 15 years, with a balloon payment for the balance due at 10 years (exactly how most modern ships are financed today) and you've put a ship within reach of a party of scruffy PC's.
Could you provide a more detailed example (including numbers and lots of connect-the-dots examples) of how that works?
RainOfSteel
March 23rd, 2005, 02:19 AM
Ok, let me step in and explain what I meant by my remark, "break the rest of the system".
When you extend the mortgage term to 80 years, payment sizes drop dramatically. Starship crews can, under the original expenses figures given in CT, can do more than ok, they'll do a gangbusters business, have plenty left over for speculation, and will grow wildly rich very quickly.
When I was really working on this idea (1985, age 15), I really wasn't smart enough to figure out a complete new set of interlocking and working rules to make the whole thing run properly from a [i]game balance perspective[/b]. So that the PCs wouldn't be broke-for-sure just for owning the starship, and wouldn't be run-away rich overnight, either.
It appears I'm still not really smart enough to figure it out. graemlins/file_28.gif
At least not tonight.
<shuts down computer, flops into bed />
When you extend the mortgage term to 80 years, payment sizes drop dramatically. Starship crews can, under the original expenses figures given in CT, can do more than ok, they'll do a gangbusters business, have plenty left over for speculation, and will grow wildly rich very quickly.
When I was really working on this idea (1985, age 15), I really wasn't smart enough to figure out a complete new set of interlocking and working rules to make the whole thing run properly from a [i]game balance perspective[/b]. So that the PCs wouldn't be broke-for-sure just for owning the starship, and wouldn't be run-away rich overnight, either.
It appears I'm still not really smart enough to figure it out. graemlins/file_28.gif
At least not tonight.
<shuts down computer, flops into bed />
veltyen
March 23rd, 2005, 02:42 AM
There is a point made in the write-up of the Theseus paradox that may have some import.
Registration numbers are often attached to specific items in modern vehicles. It is how these vehicles have a legal trade in parts. Therefore if only that component survives the vehicle can exist again.
For example in most cars there are two registered components, the chasis and the engine. The engine can be changed over (you just need to register the new number) but the chasis counts as the car.
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull. Maybe that is what needs replacing/recertification at this point in time. Make recertification a painful experience (takes 6 months, rarely succeeds, requires removal of all non-hull components for example) and most entities will strip the ship for parts and buy a new one.
While you will just be buying a new superstructure and transferring all of the pre-existing components accross in some cases, this is still a new ship as the remade/recertified hull would have a different registration, even though the functionality, crew, and a large proportion of the original components are the same.
In some places the "failed" hulls may be reused. For example the hull may have lesser requirements for recertification if it is system-only rather then an interstellar. Poor systems especially may gobble these up for planetary defense rather then building purpose specific defense craft. It also fits the "Monitors are often surplussed Naval vessels".
That means the "life" of a freetrader may involve 40 years of system hopping, rebirth for 40 years as a ground landing capable system defense vessel, then 40 years as an orbital only SDB, before being wrecked as it is no longer certifiable in any manner.
Registration numbers are often attached to specific items in modern vehicles. It is how these vehicles have a legal trade in parts. Therefore if only that component survives the vehicle can exist again.
For example in most cars there are two registered components, the chasis and the engine. The engine can be changed over (you just need to register the new number) but the chasis counts as the car.
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull. Maybe that is what needs replacing/recertification at this point in time. Make recertification a painful experience (takes 6 months, rarely succeeds, requires removal of all non-hull components for example) and most entities will strip the ship for parts and buy a new one.
While you will just be buying a new superstructure and transferring all of the pre-existing components accross in some cases, this is still a new ship as the remade/recertified hull would have a different registration, even though the functionality, crew, and a large proportion of the original components are the same.
In some places the "failed" hulls may be reused. For example the hull may have lesser requirements for recertification if it is system-only rather then an interstellar. Poor systems especially may gobble these up for planetary defense rather then building purpose specific defense craft. It also fits the "Monitors are often surplussed Naval vessels".
That means the "life" of a freetrader may involve 40 years of system hopping, rebirth for 40 years as a ground landing capable system defense vessel, then 40 years as an orbital only SDB, before being wrecked as it is no longer certifiable in any manner.
RainOfSteel
March 23rd, 2005, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by veltyen:
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull. Maybe that is what needs replacing/recertification at this point in time. Make recertification a painful experience (takes 6 months, rarely succeeds, requires removal of all non-hull components for example) and most entities will strip the ship for parts and buy a new one.
Oddly enough, I feel the hull, especially in the case of the higher tech hulls, is the most survivable component on the ship, the one most likely to last the longest.
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull. Maybe that is what needs replacing/recertification at this point in time. Make recertification a painful experience (takes 6 months, rarely succeeds, requires removal of all non-hull components for example) and most entities will strip the ship for parts and buy a new one.
Oddly enough, I feel the hull, especially in the case of the higher tech hulls, is the most survivable component on the ship, the one most likely to last the longest.
RainOfSteel
March 23rd, 2005, 09:06 AM
Hmm, in an 80-year mortgage, if we cut the freight-rate to Cr500/dTon, and cut Mid-Passage to Cr5000 and High-Passage to Cr7000, and also cut life-support costs (by a large but as yet unknown amount), but leave crew salaries alone . . . hmmm, it'll bear thinking about. Cutting the standard freight-rate in Charted Space would be a big boost for interstellar trade under the GT:Far Trader model. If you slash costs by half, more people will do business (not that I was satisfied with the GT:Far Trader model of interstellar trade, despite its grounding in economics; primarily because it doesn't match up with written canon about trade in the 3I and Charted Space in general).
kaladorn
March 23rd, 2005, 11:55 AM
Let us also presume that maintenance costs escalate as a function of age and the likelihood of expensive large-scale system failures (such as blowing all your zuchai crystals on jump entrance or something) goes up. This makes up for the lower mortgage, to some extent, and helps keep player incomes in line too.
Fritz_Brown
March 23rd, 2005, 12:48 PM
Straybow, what about J-space barnacles and such? (What's in Jumpspace? (http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/Trav/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=42;t=000104#000000) ) Seriously, I think a lot of the wear and tear would be the fit of things - all those stresses, alternate heating/cooling, etc. would tend to make things not as tight as they should be. Oh yeah, it's fixable, but every fix will be a little less permanent than the one before. Wouldn't happen over 40 years, though.
I think veltyen is basically right on the reason for the 40-year mortgage: about right for what people are willing to pay vs. recoouping costs, etc. After all, cars (in USA) are typically financed over 3-5 years, but the cars (with care) can last 15 (or even 75, with EXTREME care) years!
And, it is probably true that most craft would get brought down a notch after the first or second 40-year mortgage. Most used cars (again, in the US) start at a couple of years old. Those are bought by people who just can't afford a new car, but they still have some money. You get to 5- to 7-year old cars, and they are bought by high school kids with jobs (whose parents won't buy them the car). You get 10+ year old cars bought by folks who have a hard time keeping a roof over their head, or the guy who owns four old cars (only one of which runs at a time) and spends a lot of time at junk yards and tinkering.
Just my .02Cr.
I think veltyen is basically right on the reason for the 40-year mortgage: about right for what people are willing to pay vs. recoouping costs, etc. After all, cars (in USA) are typically financed over 3-5 years, but the cars (with care) can last 15 (or even 75, with EXTREME care) years!
And, it is probably true that most craft would get brought down a notch after the first or second 40-year mortgage. Most used cars (again, in the US) start at a couple of years old. Those are bought by people who just can't afford a new car, but they still have some money. You get to 5- to 7-year old cars, and they are bought by high school kids with jobs (whose parents won't buy them the car). You get 10+ year old cars bought by folks who have a hard time keeping a roof over their head, or the guy who owns four old cars (only one of which runs at a time) and spends a lot of time at junk yards and tinkering.
Just my .02Cr.
Chuck Anumia
March 23rd, 2005, 01:15 PM
So then some players might want to take out a second mortgage and refinance their ships to lower payments.
Kind of like taking out a consolidation loan on your house (they do live there most of their lives after all).
The players wealth is tied up in their ships.
Kind of like taking out a consolidation loan on your house (they do live there most of their lives after all).
The players wealth is tied up in their ships.
kaladorn
March 23rd, 2005, 03:25 PM
Look less at car financing and more at container ships or tractor trailers or trains perhaps. At least for merchants.
So, I'm guessing that 40 years might represent the time a bank might want to get its investment returned over. OTOH, with some competition, you could get 50, 60, 70 year mortgage at higher interest rates. Lower overall monthly payments, better profitability for the bank in the long run, and the player ends up paying more over the whole term, but he ends up paying it slower.
The truth is 40 years is probably a nice easy number to work with. But variety is the spice of life. If you want to do the math, I can see banks that have siezed ships with 25 years paid off on their mortgage offering a 30 or 40 year mortgage to refinance the resale. It'd keep them from having to write off the remaining 15 years plus it means they could make more money on interest probably.
I think it is interesting, if somebody else cares to do some number crunching analyis smile.gif
So, I'm guessing that 40 years might represent the time a bank might want to get its investment returned over. OTOH, with some competition, you could get 50, 60, 70 year mortgage at higher interest rates. Lower overall monthly payments, better profitability for the bank in the long run, and the player ends up paying more over the whole term, but he ends up paying it slower.
The truth is 40 years is probably a nice easy number to work with. But variety is the spice of life. If you want to do the math, I can see banks that have siezed ships with 25 years paid off on their mortgage offering a 30 or 40 year mortgage to refinance the resale. It'd keep them from having to write off the remaining 15 years plus it means they could make more money on interest probably.
I think it is interesting, if somebody else cares to do some number crunching analyis smile.gif
veltyen
March 23rd, 2005, 05:32 PM
Originally by RainOfSteel:
Oddly enough, I feel the hull, especially in the case of the higher tech hulls, is the most survivable component on the ship, the one most likely to last the longest.That may be the case, the point is you may need to prove that the hull is in perfect working order. This means deep scans, reverb tests the whole nine yards in trying to determine if the hull is fatigued. The process of recertification will fail acording to the Imperial Star Flight Certification Boards recommended guidelines. How many on this board have shares in Starship Manufacturing Conecerns?
Think aircraft and freighter fatigue concerns. The hull is only as tough as is needed, any extra strength would merely be used to lighten those structures. All aircraft could be built with heavier componenets these days, but why would you when greater profit lies in greater capacity, and you can use that greater strength to carry extra load.
Oddly enough, I feel the hull, especially in the case of the higher tech hulls, is the most survivable component on the ship, the one most likely to last the longest.That may be the case, the point is you may need to prove that the hull is in perfect working order. This means deep scans, reverb tests the whole nine yards in trying to determine if the hull is fatigued. The process of recertification will fail acording to the Imperial Star Flight Certification Boards recommended guidelines. How many on this board have shares in Starship Manufacturing Conecerns?
Think aircraft and freighter fatigue concerns. The hull is only as tough as is needed, any extra strength would merely be used to lighten those structures. All aircraft could be built with heavier componenets these days, but why would you when greater profit lies in greater capacity, and you can use that greater strength to carry extra load.
kaladorn
March 23rd, 2005, 07:49 PM
Hmmm, you can justify that stance. But you can equally justify very good scanning and modelling technology at TL10+ permitting very easy analysis of the hull situation even given the abysmal state of computing in Traveller. And for every one that has a stake in the starship manufacturing companies, one could have a stake in merchant shipping lines that don't benefit from this kind of approach.
In short, you can make the answer whatever you want.
Also, keep in mind that a space ship hull faces heating and cooling, but unless it is an airframe, faces less stress than a plane or boat (well, this assumes you aren't slamming away at 4Gs...).
There is equally no reason to assume that 3I engineering (naval architecture) has not found ways to design a ship that experiences far less stress and so lasts 120 years. Similarly, there is no reason to suggest that the materials of the 3I aren't good enough to make such a hull.
A lot of naval ships *do* last longer than 40 years.
FWIW, I've been aboard boats well over 40 years old (some hundreds, and still seaworthy). I've been aboard planes over 30 and still doing active military duty. So, I don't see any reason to believe some group of future folks that are as far advanced from us (TL12-13) as we are from basic sword swingers (TL2-3) isn't going to be able to do thing with ship architecture and materials science that seem like magic to us today. And a 40 year lifespan for a hull is distinctly not magic.
Having said that, if you want to explain the 40 year mortgage and enforce 40 year limits on certifications, your arguments are fine. But they are not exactly necessarily the way science would dictate... not necessarily indicative of canonical fact. (Note, I make no claim that longer than 40 year lifespans are canonical fact either...)
I guess it boils down to what do you want in your TU. Like TheGingerBeer, I think I like the idea of merchants running around in 80, 120, even 200 year old hulls... family ships, or just well maintained older ships. Perhaps some new parts, new avionics, maybe a new computer, but essentially still the same old workhorse it always was.
In short, you can make the answer whatever you want.
Also, keep in mind that a space ship hull faces heating and cooling, but unless it is an airframe, faces less stress than a plane or boat (well, this assumes you aren't slamming away at 4Gs...).
There is equally no reason to assume that 3I engineering (naval architecture) has not found ways to design a ship that experiences far less stress and so lasts 120 years. Similarly, there is no reason to suggest that the materials of the 3I aren't good enough to make such a hull.
A lot of naval ships *do* last longer than 40 years.
FWIW, I've been aboard boats well over 40 years old (some hundreds, and still seaworthy). I've been aboard planes over 30 and still doing active military duty. So, I don't see any reason to believe some group of future folks that are as far advanced from us (TL12-13) as we are from basic sword swingers (TL2-3) isn't going to be able to do thing with ship architecture and materials science that seem like magic to us today. And a 40 year lifespan for a hull is distinctly not magic.
Having said that, if you want to explain the 40 year mortgage and enforce 40 year limits on certifications, your arguments are fine. But they are not exactly necessarily the way science would dictate... not necessarily indicative of canonical fact. (Note, I make no claim that longer than 40 year lifespans are canonical fact either...)
I guess it boils down to what do you want in your TU. Like TheGingerBeer, I think I like the idea of merchants running around in 80, 120, even 200 year old hulls... family ships, or just well maintained older ships. Perhaps some new parts, new avionics, maybe a new computer, but essentially still the same old workhorse it always was.
whartung
March 23rd, 2005, 09:23 PM
If Starships have reasonable immortality and maintenance rate, then cash starved and hungry budding Free Traders would be buying used ships up in droves and not locking themselves into barely tenable mortgages for new ships, or even better, simply leasing them. Depreciation and maintenance is a lot less (ideally) than actually buying one if you can manage the cash flow (and it's all about cash flow doncha know).
A Free Trader isn't like a house. It doesn't appreciate in value, why buy one at all and pay all that money? Or why not simply buy a used ship from Bobs Certified Pre-Owned Free Traders, and save a large chunk of change.
All of the arguments against a Free Trader being profitable rely on the fact that a FT costs so much in the first place. I mean, hiring a more experienced engineer and a 40 yr old starship at 50% the cost of new is money in the bank.
Heck, most airlines lease their planes today, don't they?
I had an interesting conversation with a Canadian F-18 maintenance guy at an air show. They plan on keeping their F-18's for 25-30 years, and every, I guess, 2000 hours or so (every couple of years), tear the plane apart completely and put it back together again.
Now, a Free Trader isn't an F-18, and should be more basic and more easily maintained. But, the point is that much like folks remodel their houses, or swap out components on their vehicles tells me that when you approach it from a cash flow point of view vs an equity issue, ships should be reasonably immortal with the occasional big refit.
Obviously, today, large sea going vessels have a limited useful life and are eventually scrapped, but it would be interesting what the primary motivator is for that. Typically I think it's simply tax reasons, you can't depreicate it any more, can't write it off any more, and the cost of a new one plus write off is less than maintaining the old one and you get a more modern and more efficient design instead.
A Free Trader isn't like a house. It doesn't appreciate in value, why buy one at all and pay all that money? Or why not simply buy a used ship from Bobs Certified Pre-Owned Free Traders, and save a large chunk of change.
All of the arguments against a Free Trader being profitable rely on the fact that a FT costs so much in the first place. I mean, hiring a more experienced engineer and a 40 yr old starship at 50% the cost of new is money in the bank.
Heck, most airlines lease their planes today, don't they?
I had an interesting conversation with a Canadian F-18 maintenance guy at an air show. They plan on keeping their F-18's for 25-30 years, and every, I guess, 2000 hours or so (every couple of years), tear the plane apart completely and put it back together again.
Now, a Free Trader isn't an F-18, and should be more basic and more easily maintained. But, the point is that much like folks remodel their houses, or swap out components on their vehicles tells me that when you approach it from a cash flow point of view vs an equity issue, ships should be reasonably immortal with the occasional big refit.
Obviously, today, large sea going vessels have a limited useful life and are eventually scrapped, but it would be interesting what the primary motivator is for that. Typically I think it's simply tax reasons, you can't depreicate it any more, can't write it off any more, and the cost of a new one plus write off is less than maintaining the old one and you get a more modern and more efficient design instead.
kaladorn
March 23rd, 2005, 09:49 PM
When refit costs and the inefficiencies of older engines, etc. start to come into play, then you start seeing people think about a replacement. For passenger ships or even for cargo ships, age can be a factor in getting custom... in the case of passengers, people want the latest amenities and safety features and communications, and in the case of cargo transport, newer double hull construction for oil as case in point, may be either mandated or else just be a good idea that reduces the cost to insure the cargo transport hence making it more attractive.
A ship can obviously fight this situation by dropping the rate it charges, hence making it more attractive, but reducing its profitability.
At some point, the escalating maintenance and operating costs, the costs to add new features which can be prodigious in scope and expense, and the insurance and passenger/customer confidence issues may well drive the owners to scrap a ship or sell it off to some fringe line that wants to run grain loads between worlds in a backwater system.
The Canadian Hercules fleet (they are cargo haulers) is the world's oldest fleet of these planes with the most miles on them. They get regularly repaired but their upkeep cost has went up over the years. They're also sometimes maintenance downchecked when they are vitally necessary. This has been a problem for Canada several times. A traveller equivalent would be you saving a bunch buying the 60 year old ship, but every once and a while, you might default on a cargo because some key component goes *even though* you have a crack engineer.
Additionally, as ships age, getting parts for them may become more challenging and expensive (or just not possible) forcing refits, upgrades, or decomissioning.
So, having old ships is a very neat idea, but they come with perils and at some point, it'll be time to get something newer. But it makes a great starter for an adventuring group.
A ship can obviously fight this situation by dropping the rate it charges, hence making it more attractive, but reducing its profitability.
At some point, the escalating maintenance and operating costs, the costs to add new features which can be prodigious in scope and expense, and the insurance and passenger/customer confidence issues may well drive the owners to scrap a ship or sell it off to some fringe line that wants to run grain loads between worlds in a backwater system.
The Canadian Hercules fleet (they are cargo haulers) is the world's oldest fleet of these planes with the most miles on them. They get regularly repaired but their upkeep cost has went up over the years. They're also sometimes maintenance downchecked when they are vitally necessary. This has been a problem for Canada several times. A traveller equivalent would be you saving a bunch buying the 60 year old ship, but every once and a while, you might default on a cargo because some key component goes *even though* you have a crack engineer.
Additionally, as ships age, getting parts for them may become more challenging and expensive (or just not possible) forcing refits, upgrades, or decomissioning.
So, having old ships is a very neat idea, but they come with perils and at some point, it'll be time to get something newer. But it makes a great starter for an adventuring group.
roygbiv
March 23rd, 2005, 09:49 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by veltyen:
There is a point made in the write-up of the Theseus paradox that may have some import.
I have yet to read it. Will try tonight.
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull.
I have to disagree with you there. Dude, we're talking about bonded superdense!
But maybe you have a different idea of what that comprises, though I have two pieces of canon on my side. The GT ruleset is specific: ships which are regularly maintained don't suffer any significant deterioration until after about 180 years.
Someone else has suggested that we consider TNE's Equipment Maintenance rules. Well I think that also supports my case because some 70 years elapsed between the release of Virus and the beginning of the TNE time period. This means that a vessel who had been completed in 1130 could be recovered and put to use at the grand old age of 70. Ships which had already been in service are also being reactivated and some of them have to be approaching 100 years old at that point.
Guys: I don't really want to start with the rules lawyership and I'm not proposing something that will break any of the existing trade systems. Instead, what I'm suggesting is a way for a bunch of miscrean--er--player characters to get a hold of a functioning starship without having to form their own mercantile concern. Remember, this is not supposed to be Adventures in Accurate Accounting, unless you play with a bunch of economic gearheads.
So that I don't hijack this thread, I'll start a new topic which outlines my optional (read IMTU). method of ship procurement.
There is a point made in the write-up of the Theseus paradox that may have some import.
I have yet to read it. Will try tonight.
40 years is a long time for a stressed hull.
I have to disagree with you there. Dude, we're talking about bonded superdense!
But maybe you have a different idea of what that comprises, though I have two pieces of canon on my side. The GT ruleset is specific: ships which are regularly maintained don't suffer any significant deterioration until after about 180 years.
Someone else has suggested that we consider TNE's Equipment Maintenance rules. Well I think that also supports my case because some 70 years elapsed between the release of Virus and the beginning of the TNE time period. This means that a vessel who had been completed in 1130 could be recovered and put to use at the grand old age of 70. Ships which had already been in service are also being reactivated and some of them have to be approaching 100 years old at that point.
Guys: I don't really want to start with the rules lawyership and I'm not proposing something that will break any of the existing trade systems. Instead, what I'm suggesting is a way for a bunch of miscrean--er--player characters to get a hold of a functioning starship without having to form their own mercantile concern. Remember, this is not supposed to be Adventures in Accurate Accounting, unless you play with a bunch of economic gearheads.
So that I don't hijack this thread, I'll start a new topic which outlines my optional (read IMTU). method of ship procurement.
roygbiv
March 23rd, 2005, 09:56 PM
Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
Could you provide a more detailed example (including numbers and lots of connect-the-dots examples) of how that works? Will do, in another thread.
Could you provide a more detailed example (including numbers and lots of connect-the-dots examples) of how that works? Will do, in another thread.
Border Reiver
March 23rd, 2005, 10:07 PM
Here, here! Good show that man Biv.
Just a thought when it comes to hulls, the UK's Polaris fleet, the Resolution Class SSBN managed nearly 25 years of service without getting in too much of a state. I suspect bonded superdense hulls would last at least ten times as long and manufacturing techniques 3000 years from now will be pretty good. My only concern is corporations building in redudancy so that you need to upgrade to the latest model 2/bis or that the jump drive will fail the day after the warranty runs out.
Just a thought when it comes to hulls, the UK's Polaris fleet, the Resolution Class SSBN managed nearly 25 years of service without getting in too much of a state. I suspect bonded superdense hulls would last at least ten times as long and manufacturing techniques 3000 years from now will be pretty good. My only concern is corporations building in redudancy so that you need to upgrade to the latest model 2/bis or that the jump drive will fail the day after the warranty runs out.
veltyen
March 23rd, 2005, 11:06 PM
I have to disagree with you there. Dude, we're talking about bonded superdense!Which weighs more, a kg of steel or a kg of marshmellow.
A case in point, I am not a small person and I have recently started to ride to work. I have been trying to obtain stronger wheels/spokes to support my mass (I am 197cm tall and 140kg or so). Amongst production parts this isn't possible. While titanium alloys and high grade steel are available, and these materials are MUCH stronger then low-grade steel or aluminium, it is very difficult to obtain a stronger wheel.
Why? The extra tensile properties of the materials used are squandered by using less of the material.
So "Bonded Superdense" doesn't help you, it may as well be pig iron from the point of strength and fatigue. There will just be a lot less of it.
A case in point, I am not a small person and I have recently started to ride to work. I have been trying to obtain stronger wheels/spokes to support my mass (I am 197cm tall and 140kg or so). Amongst production parts this isn't possible. While titanium alloys and high grade steel are available, and these materials are MUCH stronger then low-grade steel or aluminium, it is very difficult to obtain a stronger wheel.
Why? The extra tensile properties of the materials used are squandered by using less of the material.
So "Bonded Superdense" doesn't help you, it may as well be pig iron from the point of strength and fatigue. There will just be a lot less of it.
kaladorn
March 24th, 2005, 12:38 AM
Hard to say, veltyen. What's marshmellow? graemlins/file_23.gif
And I have to say 'that depends'. An AV of 40 (MT terms) requires a certain amount of X, Y or Z, (metals). The amounts Xa, Ya, Za will depend on the properties of X, Y and Z respectively.
But, if you build a hull of equal thickness (not AV), then you will have a different hull.
Plus just because there is less of something doesn't mean it will last less long, of necessity. That makes some pretty big assumptions right there.
For instance, we use a lawnmower that is older than me, and I'm 36. It has cut *a lot* of grass, but with regular maintenance, it has lasted a stupendous length of time. I recently terminated a refrigerator (and I could have had it fixed) that was night on 25 years old. My car has 9 years on it and looks almost like new despite 150,000 miles.
So, with regular maintenance, mechanical systems can last a long, long time.
Maybe there should be some sort of 'robustness' factor in the design sequence so that you could design that ship that can last 120 years vs the one that starts coming apart after 40.
Another example is my combat boots from my days as an infanteer. I got out of the armed forces 18 years ago (I served about a year when I was 17-18). They're the best boots I've ever owned and show no signs of wearing out (eventually I'll wear off the tread, but the leather with regular maintenance about once a year is holding up very well.
I've got straight razors that Grandad used in 1918 in the Trenches.
So, things can survive well beyond the estimated lifespan.
The Hercules I talked about earlier were supposed to have about a 15 year lifespan. Some must be close to 40 now. Canada is the king of life extension projects! My FN (when I was in the service) was 31 years old and worked just fine thanks!
And I have to say 'that depends'. An AV of 40 (MT terms) requires a certain amount of X, Y or Z, (metals). The amounts Xa, Ya, Za will depend on the properties of X, Y and Z respectively.
But, if you build a hull of equal thickness (not AV), then you will have a different hull.
Plus just because there is less of something doesn't mean it will last less long, of necessity. That makes some pretty big assumptions right there.
For instance, we use a lawnmower that is older than me, and I'm 36. It has cut *a lot* of grass, but with regular maintenance, it has lasted a stupendous length of time. I recently terminated a refrigerator (and I could have had it fixed) that was night on 25 years old. My car has 9 years on it and looks almost like new despite 150,000 miles.
So, with regular maintenance, mechanical systems can last a long, long time.
Maybe there should be some sort of 'robustness' factor in the design sequence so that you could design that ship that can last 120 years vs the one that starts coming apart after 40.
Another example is my combat boots from my days as an infanteer. I got out of the armed forces 18 years ago (I served about a year when I was 17-18). They're the best boots I've ever owned and show no signs of wearing out (eventually I'll wear off the tread, but the leather with regular maintenance about once a year is holding up very well.
I've got straight razors that Grandad used in 1918 in the Trenches.
So, things can survive well beyond the estimated lifespan.
The Hercules I talked about earlier were supposed to have about a 15 year lifespan. Some must be close to 40 now. Canada is the king of life extension projects! My FN (when I was in the service) was 31 years old and worked just fine thanks!
jasper
March 24th, 2005, 08:14 AM
Lets talks socks. My dad gave me a pair of his military green socks in 82 just before I left for basic. He retired in 70. I threw out around 95 because I had finally worn a hole in the heel. the Military socks I was issued at basic did not last my first term. Some times you just have to remember some stuff is just a game rule and drive on.
Border Reiver
March 24th, 2005, 09:03 AM
I still have my first pair of boots and socks from 86. I barely wear the boots now as I have no reason to but the socks are still going strong though I have darned them several time, an essential military skill.
Lets face it some thing are just built to last. My first L1A1 SLR came with wooden funiture dating it back to the 60's.
The British Army still uses a MFDC/AFDC portable firing computer which is essentially a Hewlett Packard Scientific Calculator from the early 80's which has been ruggedized. They worked great as long as you kept the batteries warm (stuffing them down your underwear worked well).
George MacDonald-Fraser once asked what the remote peoples of the world would do when the last Lee-Enfield wore out? Well it still hasn't happened yet as evidenced in pictures from Afghanistan, Sudan, Algeria et al. But it seems the answer to that is pick up an AK-47 and carry on as they have for the past 500 years.
As Jasper says, it's just a game. Some ships are buckets and others are the Queen Mary.
Lets face it some thing are just built to last. My first L1A1 SLR came with wooden funiture dating it back to the 60's.
The British Army still uses a MFDC/AFDC portable firing computer which is essentially a Hewlett Packard Scientific Calculator from the early 80's which has been ruggedized. They worked great as long as you kept the batteries warm (stuffing them down your underwear worked well).
George MacDonald-Fraser once asked what the remote peoples of the world would do when the last Lee-Enfield wore out? Well it still hasn't happened yet as evidenced in pictures from Afghanistan, Sudan, Algeria et al. But it seems the answer to that is pick up an AK-47 and carry on as they have for the past 500 years.
As Jasper says, it's just a game. Some ships are buckets and others are the Queen Mary.
RainOfSteel
March 24th, 2005, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by cweiskircher:
So then some players might want to take out a second mortgage and refinance their ships to lower payments.
I wonder if, in the long-term minded and economically stagnant version of the Imperium that seems to be the OTU, will the contract with the bank even allow refinancing? Won't the bank just simplify by disallowing that from the beginning to keep all the money for itself? I mean, it's not exactly like there are financial laws that provide for disclosure, or even fairness.
So then some players might want to take out a second mortgage and refinance their ships to lower payments.
I wonder if, in the long-term minded and economically stagnant version of the Imperium that seems to be the OTU, will the contract with the bank even allow refinancing? Won't the bank just simplify by disallowing that from the beginning to keep all the money for itself? I mean, it's not exactly like there are financial laws that provide for disclosure, or even fairness.
whartung
March 24th, 2005, 02:22 PM
One of the problems with things like parts availability boils down to the ubiquity of the product involved.
It's easy to get caught up in details that there are several competing ship component manufacturers, and that just because I have a TL-12 power plant doesn't mean I can get parts from any TL-12 Starport. Or heck that I can get them at any higher TL Starport.
"I don't want FOP God damnit, I'm a Dapper Dan man!"
"Watch you language sir, this is a public store. We don't carry Dapper Dan, only FOP. We can order it and it'll be here in a couple of weeks."
"Well what a geographic oddity we have here. Two weeks from everywhere!"
Now I don't think anyone really runs their game with concerns about parts availability (save for dramatic purposes). But as presented I can get parts at any A or B starport for my ships.
Regarding technical obsolesence, I think we can agree that a TL-12 hull would be dramatically different from a TL-15 hull, but then this just brings up the whole issue about TL diferentiation anyway.
If you have well connected worlds with grade A starports, why they aren't all selling the same TL-15 products is beyond me (save where there is no benefit at all). With the percieved volume of trade taking place, beyond foodstuffs may as well import anything you can't manufacture, because TL improves not just product capability, but also quality and, most notably, manufacturing. Despite the fact that our modern cars are just better in all sorts of ways, we can build them faster and cheaper with modern assembly techniques, thus giving them a price advantage over a lower tech competitor.
The only things keeping TL products out are basically shipment costs. Looking at modern container freight, we can see that while shipping is an expense, it's still cheaper to build overseas and ship it, than build locally.
So, I really think its important to get a handle on the ship market. If ships are immortal, players shouldn't be buying new ones, and they should cost 50%-70% of new.
And since the monthly economic burden is less on a used ship, the players could "afford" a missed cargo now and then due to a maintenance issue.
It's easy to get caught up in details that there are several competing ship component manufacturers, and that just because I have a TL-12 power plant doesn't mean I can get parts from any TL-12 Starport. Or heck that I can get them at any higher TL Starport.
"I don't want FOP God damnit, I'm a Dapper Dan man!"
"Watch you language sir, this is a public store. We don't carry Dapper Dan, only FOP. We can order it and it'll be here in a couple of weeks."
"Well what a geographic oddity we have here. Two weeks from everywhere!"
Now I don't think anyone really runs their game with concerns about parts availability (save for dramatic purposes). But as presented I can get parts at any A or B starport for my ships.
Regarding technical obsolesence, I think we can agree that a TL-12 hull would be dramatically different from a TL-15 hull, but then this just brings up the whole issue about TL diferentiation anyway.
If you have well connected worlds with grade A starports, why they aren't all selling the same TL-15 products is beyond me (save where there is no benefit at all). With the percieved volume of trade taking place, beyond foodstuffs may as well import anything you can't manufacture, because TL improves not just product capability, but also quality and, most notably, manufacturing. Despite the fact that our modern cars are just better in all sorts of ways, we can build them faster and cheaper with modern assembly techniques, thus giving them a price advantage over a lower tech competitor.
The only things keeping TL products out are basically shipment costs. Looking at modern container freight, we can see that while shipping is an expense, it's still cheaper to build overseas and ship it, than build locally.
So, I really think its important to get a handle on the ship market. If ships are immortal, players shouldn't be buying new ones, and they should cost 50%-70% of new.
And since the monthly economic burden is less on a used ship, the players could "afford" a missed cargo now and then due to a maintenance issue.
Fritz_Brown
March 24th, 2005, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by kaladorn:
I've got straight razors that Grandad used in 1918 in the Trenches.They haven't been used much, eh? Otherwise, I would think they would be down to the nubbins! smile.gif
whartung, I think that is (IMHO) the reason the OTU has somewhat of a kluged appearance on the players side. The system (computer-based) for which I am a contractor has been around for going on 10 years. We have to field a change to the software partly because nobody supports the OS versions, database versions, etc. with which it was originally fielded any more. And, we have to field new hardware partly because we can't actually get the hardware that will run the old OS's, DB's, etc. anymore. And, to sustain us through fielding the new system, we are having to start scrounging for the old hardware when it breaks. Somehow, I think that is a human nature thing, and won't change in 53 millenia, much less 53 centuries.
I've got straight razors that Grandad used in 1918 in the Trenches.They haven't been used much, eh? Otherwise, I would think they would be down to the nubbins! smile.gif
whartung, I think that is (IMHO) the reason the OTU has somewhat of a kluged appearance on the players side. The system (computer-based) for which I am a contractor has been around for going on 10 years. We have to field a change to the software partly because nobody supports the OS versions, database versions, etc. with which it was originally fielded any more. And, we have to field new hardware partly because we can't actually get the hardware that will run the old OS's, DB's, etc. anymore. And, to sustain us through fielding the new system, we are having to start scrounging for the old hardware when it breaks. Somehow, I think that is a human nature thing, and won't change in 53 millenia, much less 53 centuries.
roygbiv
March 24th, 2005, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by Fritz88:
And, to sustain us through fielding the new system, we are having to start scrounging for the old hardware when it breaks. Somehow, I think that is a human nature thing, and won't change in 53 millenia, much less 53 centuries. [/QB]We don't have true rapid prototyping. And your hardware manufacturer (who may not be in business any longer) doesn't have an 11,000 world market to saturate.
I guarantee that there will be a thriving business in "after market" parts for extremely popular ship classes such as the Iiken, Marava, and Beowulf.
And, to sustain us through fielding the new system, we are having to start scrounging for the old hardware when it breaks. Somehow, I think that is a human nature thing, and won't change in 53 millenia, much less 53 centuries. [/QB]We don't have true rapid prototyping. And your hardware manufacturer (who may not be in business any longer) doesn't have an 11,000 world market to saturate.
I guarantee that there will be a thriving business in "after market" parts for extremely popular ship classes such as the Iiken, Marava, and Beowulf.
RainOfSteel
March 25th, 2005, 01:32 AM
roygbiv mentioned the magic phrase, "rapid prototyping".
I can easily imagine high tech engineering shops containing equipment that can literally grow (by whatever weird process) whatever parts are necessary. Such things exist in limited format today at TL-8, and at TL-12, it's going to be a different story. (At TL-15, woo-hoo!)
I can easily imagine high tech engineering shops containing equipment that can literally grow (by whatever weird process) whatever parts are necessary. Such things exist in limited format today at TL-8, and at TL-12, it's going to be a different story. (At TL-15, woo-hoo!)
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét