• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Cargo Containers for Traveller

phavoc

SOC-11
I posted this over on the MGT board, but thought I would post it here as well. It's generic for any version of Traveller. It's also the first draft, so feel free to offer feedback. Thanks!

Traveller Freight Containers

Standardized containers are designed to carry bulk and palletized dry cargo cheaply and efficiently. They are seen throughout the Imperium at all TL’s due to their universal adoption by virtually all freighters. They are also commonly seen around downports being used as storage containers. On some worlds enterprising people have modified the containers for use as a dwelling. There are a number of pre-fabricated models that are in use throughout human space as cheap, temporary structures and bases.

All containers are designed to be exposed to brief periods of vacuum (hours, not days) to facilitate cargo transfer in orbit or other exo-atmospheric conditions. Cargo containers have the following generalized properties:

• Containers come in three basic types – Standard, Reinforced and Space-Rated.
• Standard Containers have a base armor factor of 4. Reinforced containers have a base armor factor of 8. Space-going containers are heavily reinforced with starship-grade materials and have a ship armor factor of 1.
• The standard height is 9 meters from floor to ceiling. Most containers are constructed with a basic lighting system built into the ceiling that can run for 72 hrs on internal batteries before requiring a recharge. A port on the outside of the container allows it to be connected to an external power source, which can charge the batteries.
• Temperature control (heating or cooling) may be added by installing a ½ DT heating/cooling unit (it is approximately the size of a 1m x 1m pallet). The unit costs 3,000CR and contains an onboard fuel cell that allows it to operate for a minimum of 14 days between fuelings. Containers with temperature control also have an external interface that allows the container to be run off ships power, or any other external power source.
• Units requiring gravity control may be equipped with anti-grav flooring. The anti-grav unit takes up ¼ DT, may simulate between 0G and 4G in the cargo area, and costs 25,000CR. It has the same options and characteristics as the temperature control unit.
• Containers originating from an Imperial starport, or passing through Imperial customs will are equipped with Imperial electronic customs seals from their port of origin (TL15). They may also be equipped with any lower tech seals. Many containers retain the higher TL security mechanisms to discourage unauthorized tampering.
• Any container may be converted to carry liquid cargo. An internal tank cylinder is installed within the frame of the container (the sides/doors may be removed or retained). The price for a liquid container is 2X the standard cost and -10% capacity.
• Any container may be equipped with dry bulk goods loading/unloading capacity. This can be conveyor belts, augers, roof/floor hatches, etc. Dry bulk containers cost 1.5X the cost of a standard container and -5% capacity.


Standard Containers
The most common type of container for moving freight. It consists of a light-weight plastic polymer for the external sides, with an internally reinforced frame. It is designed to vacuum resistant, to facilitate in-orbit transfers. Doors are usually only at one end of the container, but any container may have additional doors added. Internally the container has numerous tie-down rings, including the floor, ceiling and sides.

It can retain atmosphere and heat for approximately 10hrs, losing 10% of its total air volume and internal heat per hour until it’s internal atmosphere equalizes with its external environment. This is typically an adequate timeframe transfer the container from an orbiting ship and move it to the surface.

Standard containers are not meant to be exposed to space except for very brief periods during transfer. A self-sealing liner may be applied to the container that, once it is sealed, provides an air-tight seal to protect the cargo. This seal will retain the atmosphere in the container for 1 year before it starts to break down. The seal costs 500CR and is applied to the entire inside area.

Standard containers are subject to explosive decompression effects if they are suddenly exposed to vacuum without proper precautions taking place. If explosive decompression of the cargo storage area takes place, roll 2D6. On a roll of 4 or less, the container suffers explosive decompression and the outer wall will rupture in 1D6 places. On a roll of 5-8 the container is damage (bubble-like protrusions along the walls), but it retains its pressure. On a roll of 9-12 no damage is taken. The container will need to be repaired prior to its being used for vacuum-resistant storage.

Standard containers may be stacked 4 high fully loaded under 1G conditions before an external load-bearing structure is required to hold the containers. They can support cargos of approximately 50,000 kg in weight. They weigh 1,250 kg empty.


Reinforced Containers
A reinforced container appears nearly the same externally as a standard container. But closer inspection will reveal a more rugged appearance in the sides, along with additional visible internal braces and reinforced corners. These containers are not as common as standard containers, and their cost is 1.5x the cost of a standard containers. Most reinforced containers are used for cargos that are considered more valuable, or require higher-level of security.

Reinforced containers are designed to remain airtight once sealed. They may be stored in a vacuum indefinitely (providing they are not exposed to open space for the entire time) without fear of the container losing its atmosphere. They are not subject to explosive decompression.

Reinforced containers may be stacked 5 high fully loaded under 1G conditions before an external load-bearing structure is required to hold the containers. They can support cargos of approximately 65,000kg in weight. They weigh 2,500 kg empty.


Space-Rated Containers
Space-Rated containers are designed to be carried externally on starships or left exposed to space for long periods of time. The sides and doors are lined with starship hull plating, which allows for long-term exposure to space. The cargo is protected nearly as well as the inside of a starship from micro-meteorites and radiation.

Space-rated containers are uncommon, as they cost 3x what a standard container costs. Their primary use is by in-system haulers moving cargo to remote outposts. They also occasionally show up around downports or other areas as high-security storage buildings or, on lower-tech worlds, as impromptu bunkers since their structure makes them highly resistant, if not impervious, to lower tech weaponry. Modifications, such as cutting gun ports, requires the same type of equipment necessary to work on starship hulls.

Space-rated containers are airtight and can retain the internal temperature for long periods without access to external heating/cooling devices. They are impervious to explosive decompression.

Space rated containers may be stacked 3 high fully loaded under 1G conditions before an external load-bearing structure is required to hold the containers. They can support cargos of approximately 100,000kg in weight. They weight 5,000kg empty.


Types of containers:

Type A – 3m wide by 3m deep 2x2 2 DT 5,000CR

Type B1 – 3m wide by 6m deep 2x4 4DT 8,000CR
Type B2 – 4.5m wide by 6m deep 3x4 6DT 9,000CR
Type B3 – 6m wide by 4m deep 4x4 8DT 10,000CR

Type C1 – 3m wide by 9m deep 2x6 6 DT 9,000CR
Type C2 – 4.5m wide by 9m deep 3x6 9DT 10,000CR
Type C3 – 6m wide by 9m deep 4x6 12DT 12,000CR

Type D1 – 3m wide by 12m deep 2x8 8DT 10,500CR
Type D2 – 4.5m wide by 12m deep 3x8 12DT 12,500CR
Type D3 – 6m wide by 12m deep 4x8 16DT 15,000CR

Type E1 – 3m wide by 15m deep 2x10 10DT 12,000CR
Type E2 – 4.5m wide by 15m deep 3x10 15DT 14,500CR
Type E3 – 6m wide by 15m deep 4x10 20DT 18,000CR

I'll list the equipment in a separate post.
 
"The standard height is 9 meters from floor to ceiling."

Seems a little too tall for me; well, really too tall when you consider smallest (Type A) is only 3M x 3M for the floor.
 
"The standard height is 9 meters from floor to ceiling."

Seems a little too tall for me; well, really too tall when you consider smallest (Type A) is only 3M x 3M for the floor.

Oh, yeah, oops! Should have read 3m/9ft tall. :)
 
Don't forget that that .84ft (10in) is used for ceiling material, inter-floor structural members/framing, and flooring material.

Also found in this space is the life-support ducting/piping, power conduits, fiber-optic cables, grav plates, etc.

2.75m = 9ft (actually, 9 ft .2677in... I ignore the quarter-inch).
 
Last edited:
Standard containers are subject to explosive decompression effects if they are suddenly exposed to vacuum without proper precautions taking place. If explosive decompression of the cargo storage area takes place, roll 2D6. On a roll of 4 or less, the container suffers explosive decompression and the outer wall will rupture in 1D6 places. On a roll of 5-8 the container is damage (bubble-like protrusions along the walls), but it retains its pressure. On a roll of 9-12 no damage is taken. The container will need to be repaired prior to its being used for vacuum-resistant storage.

Sorry, just a couple of nitpicks:
Apart from reducing pressure (which would probably defeat the purpose of making it airtight) what 'precautions' can be carried out to prevent explosive decompression?

Reinforced containers are designed to remain airtight once sealed. They may be stored in a vacuum indefinitely (providing they are not exposed to open space for the entire time) without fear of the container losing its atmosphere. They are not subject to explosive decompression.

What's the difference between 'vacuum' and 'open space'?

Space-Rated Containers
The cargo is protected nearly as well as the inside of a starship from micro-meteorites and radiation.

Ah... Is this the difference?
 
Don't forget that that .84ft (10in) is used for ceiling material, inter-floor structural members/framing, and flooring material.

Also found in this space is the life-support ducting/piping, power conduits, fiber-optic cables, grav plates, etc.

2.75m = 9ft (actually, 9 ft .2677in... I ignore the quarter-inch).

Nope, not forgotten. What I wanted to avoid though was having anyone worrying about 10cm clearances for their cargo. Since most of the rest of Traveller reduces things down to displacement tons, its just easier to go with the carrying capability and not worry too much about the variances.

Most containers that are palletized have clearances to begin with towards the roof - even hand-packed ones.
 
Sorry, just a couple of nitpicks:
Apart from reducing pressure (which would probably defeat the purpose of making it airtight) what 'precautions' can be carried out to prevent explosive decompression?

The containers would be able to adjust to the change in pressure if given time, and still retain their seals. But explosive decompression is 'challenging' for a standard container. I mostly put that in so that if a referee was looking for some interesting games mechanics, there was something in the description that they could use (assuming they had not thought of it in the first place).

What's the difference between 'vacuum' and 'open space'?

Ah... Is this the difference?

Yep. One type is ok to store in a vacuum, but its not meant to be carted around on the outside of a ship. The other you can just strap on and go and not worry about your cargo (well, too much at least... never know when a mischevious referee is gonna toss a wrench into the players plans)
 
Nope, not forgotten. What I wanted to avoid though was having anyone worrying about 10cm clearances for their cargo. Since most of the rest of Traveller reduces things down to displacement tons, its just easier to go with the carrying capability and not worry too much about the variances.

IMTU, I have done something very similar. I have cargo decks with 3 m of available space, such that the life support, conduits, etc, are run on the outside of cargo space; the distance between all other spaces is 3m, floor to floor, with plenty of overhead space for all the life support, cabling, etc. If you think about it, 8 ft of overhead clearance is generous for starship.

I try to configure all of my designs as 4 dtons of space; 4 dtons of cargo is nominal, the amount of cargo that will fit into a standard container that fits into the 4 dton space. I am a little more standardized about "standard" containers, in that all is based on the 4 dton container. Anything too big to fit in a 4 dton container is "nonstandard," and anything smaller is configured to add up to that: 1 dton or 2 dton, and 1 m^3 nominal "small cubes," of which 9 fit into the 2 dton nominal "big cube."

I think you are spot on with your discriptions of vacuum versus explosive decompression: it's like the difference between being able to pick up 50 kg and catching 50 kg.
 
IMTU, I have done something very similar. I have cargo decks with 3 m of available space, such that the life support, conduits, etc, are run on the outside of cargo space; the distance between all other spaces is 3m, floor to floor, with plenty of overhead space for all the life support, cabling, etc. If you think about it, 8 ft of overhead clearance is generous for starship.

I try to configure all of my designs as 4 dtons of space; 4 dtons of cargo is nominal, the amount of cargo that will fit into a standard container that fits into the 4 dton space. I am a little more standardized about "standard" containers, in that all is based on the 4 dton container. Anything too big to fit in a 4 dton container is "nonstandard," and anything smaller is configured to add up to that: 1 dton or 2 dton, and 1 m^3 nominal "small cubes," of which 9 fit into the 2 dton nominal "big cube."

For the smaller freighters, it makes sense to have the smaller cubes. And some will actually hand-load cargo. But if you bought a lot of cargo, or are transporting someone elses, there's always security to think about. So cargo owners are going to want to know that their cargo made it from point A to point B without someone rifling through it. And customs guys are going to want to know you aren't smuggling stuff too. So containerization makes a lot of sense in the future like it does today.

Plus the bigger freighters are going to carry bigger containers. It's more effecient. That's why the different sizes of containers.

I think you are spot on with your discriptions of vacuum versus explosive decompression: it's like the difference between being able to pick up 50 kg and catching 50 kg.

Thanks! :)
 
What's the difference between 'vacuum' and 'open space'?

For game purposes, vacuum is ≤0.001 Bar, but with anything under 0.1 bar treated as "essentially vacuum"...
For science purposes 1E-12 Bar (1E-7 Pa) is considered ultra pure vacuum.

Deep space is measured in atoms per cubic meter. Still, that's a discernable if infinitesimal pressure.

Space is anything under 1 Pa pressure (0.00001 Bar).

Std Atm is 101325Pa or 1.01325 Bar
 
Last edited:
I think you are spot on with your discriptions of vacuum versus explosive decompression: it's like the difference between being able to pick up 50 kg and catching 50 kg.

So what you're saying is that a standard container is susceptible to a rapid rate of change of pressure? They can be stored at normal pressure or vacuum, but if the cargo bay is suddenly holed, the containers may blow too?

For game purposes, vacuum is ≤0.001 Bar, but with anything under 0.1 bar treated as "essentially vacuum"...
For science purposes 1E-12 Bar (1E-7 Pa) is considered ultra pure vacuum.

Deep space is measured in atoms per cubic meter. Still, that's a discernable if infinitesimal pressure.

Space is anything under 1 Pa pressure (0.00001 Bar).

Std Atm is 101325Pa or 1.01325 Bar

Or is it, as Aramis suggests, a question of how 'hard' is the vacuum?
 
So what you're saying is that a standard container is susceptible to a rapid rate of change of pressure? They can be stored at normal pressure or vacuum, but if the cargo bay is suddenly holed, the containers may blow too?

more like, if you open them when their fully pressureised, while the outside is vacumn, then you'll damage the containter, unless you bleed off the internal pressure via some method (i.e. take precautions)
 
So what you're saying is that a standard container is susceptible to a rapid rate of change of pressure? They can be stored at normal pressure or vacuum, but if the cargo bay is suddenly holed, the containers may blow too?

Or is it, as Aramis suggests, a question of how 'hard' is the vacuum?

It's more of a simple game mechanism. There is a chance they could rupture if your cargo holds were pressurized and were suddenly decompressed (from say a pirate attack).

The referee can just as easily waive the idea. However I added it there so at least its mentioned and can be used, or not, as needed.

As a player, and mostly as referee, it's nice to have more things to throw at my players..

Referee "The missile strike hits your port-side loading bay door and blows it wide open"

Player "Whew! At least we didn't suffer any real damage! Let's jump out of here so we can deliver our cargo and make some creds!"

Referee (rolls some dice behind the mysterious place know as 'behind the referee's screen') "Oh. My. That missile strike caused 4 containers to rupture"

Players "Oh noes! Our monkeyspice plants are ruined!"

Referee "Hey, at least you managed to get away without any damage. Oh, by the way, the bank will be expecting your those three months of ship payments you were behind on when you arrive in-system"
 
And the Jobbo the Mutt wants his 'monkeyspice'...

And customs has a few questions about some anomalous contamination readings...

:)
 
Hopefully on topic so here goes.

Posting a link to these rather ingenious cargo containers I recently found online, the really cool bit is that such can be 'collapsed' and folded down nearly flat when not in use.

That would be a pretty neat little item for small owner-operators of cargo runners to consider outfitting their ships with to save space and add flexibility to their respective holds.

http://shippinginsouthafrica.wordpr...ng-shipping-container-boy-do-i-love-shipping/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/staxxon/

http://www.gizmag.com/the-cargoshel...nt-for-the-standard-shipping-container/13736/
 
Back
Top