Colonizing Ships and Colonies There Of
- Thread starter sinbadsam
- Start date
shadowdragon
SOC-12
my apologies bill- i was distracted by phone and kids when i went thru that post. feel free to ignore most of my response 
i re-read it and i understand your point, and since i have no access to government studies, all i can do is look at it from the game mechanics point of veiw. which is where i was coming from anyway. i dont know s(*& from shineolla as regards to ACTUALL xenobiology, not a subject i covered...
i re-read it and i understand your point, and since i have no access to government studies, all i can do is look at it from the game mechanics point of veiw. which is where i was coming from anyway. i dont know s(*& from shineolla as regards to ACTUALL xenobiology, not a subject i covered...
shadowdragon
SOC-12
thank you bill - you too
alanb-
there is a smattering of difference between overseas and many lightyears away. in the context of the game mechanic, the difference is much less, but also, people who "work" overseas (offplanet) versus people who "move" overseas (offplanet) are also significantly different. it makes sense to leave em or not have em if it is too dangerous to bring em, but its also temporary. most of the time moving is a rather permanent action.
self supporting colonies are benifited by population growth, and yes one hopes by tl8 or so it becomes completely controlable, anytime, anywhere. at the same time, does not a pioneer mentality generally include a strong tie to family and all that? my fondness for heinlein may be looked down upon by some
but he was a true thinker. maybe handicapped by his era, but still he was an order of magnituted more intelligent than most of the people i have ever talked to, including myself, and he seemed to feel that regardless of the tl your colony is built, pioneer types are the ones with the best chance for success. and the ones who are pro family are even more likely to be successful.
anyhoot im done
alanb-
there is a smattering of difference between overseas and many lightyears away. in the context of the game mechanic, the difference is much less, but also, people who "work" overseas (offplanet) versus people who "move" overseas (offplanet) are also significantly different. it makes sense to leave em or not have em if it is too dangerous to bring em, but its also temporary. most of the time moving is a rather permanent action.
self supporting colonies are benifited by population growth, and yes one hopes by tl8 or so it becomes completely controlable, anytime, anywhere. at the same time, does not a pioneer mentality generally include a strong tie to family and all that? my fondness for heinlein may be looked down upon by some
anyhoot im done
Well, that was Heinlein's opinion, and it's loaded with lots of baggage which I'm not going to discuss here.
The whole point of a scientific and methodical approach to colonisation is to minimise the danger. Ideally, none of your colonists should die. That's why you don't even land on the world until you have run probes around testing and checking everything you can possibly test and check.
Everything you do should be done carefully and methodically. Nothing should be left to chance (if it can be avoided). It's slow, it's careful, and hopefully nobody dies.
Sure, it's time consuming and expensive, but then again, is it actually more expensive than losing your entire expedition? Is it too expensive when compared to gaining control of an entire planet?
This is not about "pioneers". This is about scientists, doctors, engineers, technicians, construction workers and, well, yes, bureaucrats. It's about people operating robots and remote probes, and studying satellite imagery. Yes, it's about people actually going out in the field in person, too, but only when they have a pretty good idea of what dangers exist, and how to circumvent them. (In theory. Of course, in a crisis...)
This is not the Wild West, or Plymouth Rock. It's more like an Antarctic research station.
Doing it the other way is dangerous, and you risk losing everything just so you can cut a few corners.
---
OK, enough snarkiness. Let's try something constructive.
You want to play a "40 acres and a mule" setting. As we've seen, there are likely to be a bunch of problems with that. Can they be overcome?
Actually, yes, they can.
The first thing is for someone to actually spend forty years or so doing their homework before the colonists are sent. That simply means that you have to tweak your timeline by forty years. You can then carry on regardless, and it is less likely that anyone would accuse the people who planned the mission of incompetence. It's a compromise with my approach, of course.
A good tweak, incidentally, would be to have had the world ecologically "seeded" before the colonists arrive. Essentially, that means that the researchers would have released a variety of terrestrial species on the world, and allowed them to go wild. That means that there are sources of food, fibre and fuel beyond what the colonists themselves can establish. If their crops fail, they have a backup.
This idea is actually based on what happened historically with the early North American colonies, which were to a considerable extent established on land that had been previously cultivated by the native population. Our version (fortunately) doesn't have a previous population to be dispossessed, but the area around the colony site can instead be deliberately seeded ahead of time.
While I think of it: your colony should also be preceded by an advanced party, just to make sure the arrival of the main party runs smoothly. The researchers aren't necessarily on the same wavelength, and probably don't work for the same people.
OK, so your colonists aren't going in blind, and they have a Plan B. That's a considerable improvement, even though the economics of it all still don't make sense.
EDIT: I've cut out my nasty comment about "pioneer types".
Just to get back to basics, here's the fundamental problem from a game POV.
If you're not using OTU, that's fine. But in that case you either have a J1 ship, or you go sublight, because frankly I can't see any society developing J2 without having colonized something, somewhere, initially.
If you go sublight, then it's truly a "one way trip" and most probably into a fairly unknown land. The best in planning would be from some previous robotic probes that sent back reasonable data about some "habitability" index for the new land.
Another thing if you go sublight would be to send the colony in phases. The first wave are the specialists and scientists designed to stabilized the situation and make a new world beachhead in preperation for subsequent colonists arriving next year, or next two years.
This gives the colony the ability to establish iteself using the specialists without having to necessarily be distracted by the "real" colonists coming later. When the next wave arrives, they'll either have the colony set up and running, or they'll all be dead or dying, but have lots of documentation as to why and, ideally, what to do about it.
Now, if you have a J1 ship, then you're no longer bound to a one way trip. You can build a ship that should be able to not just make the trip, but get back as well and start making regular runs (as in every few months). In this case, then I think you'll indeed see more of a "town planner" model, simply because it's safest.
A good colony effort should be able to wait the few months or years to get a lot of the unknowns out of the way before the actual colony population arrives. It's simply not worth the risk otherwise.
Also, while the early American colonists struggled in the new lands, technology and "modern" medical knowledge can do a lot to reduce the risk. Through food preservation, nutritional supplements, anti-biotics, etc. As well as simply better gear, and labor saving devices like a chain saw recharged with solar power, a wind generator, or off of the ships power plant. An electric chain saw and an electric powered Tractor will get the land cleared and prepared for crops quite quickly, with little risk to the workers. Not only are they more efficient, they're safer.
While heavy industry is necessary to create such tools, it's not necessary to use them, nor to typically repair them assuming you have spares. And most tractors I've seen are pretty darn rugged and shoulld survive most anything. Generators are pretty reliable as well.
These items may not last the life of the colony, but they'll last long enough to get good use out of them and get the colony going that much faster.
So, IMHO, any :"true" colonisation effort needs to be done at a fairly low tech level. A sublight colonisation effort can be compared to the Mayflower and early American efforts. A J1 colonisation effort can be compared to, say, the Oregon Trail style of colonisation -- lots of pioneers going out in to the wilds, but while remote, they do in fact have civilisation mostly at their back. And colonisation during the OTU would be like colonizing anyplace on the planet today with available air power today, minus instant communications.
If you're not using OTU, that's fine. But in that case you either have a J1 ship, or you go sublight, because frankly I can't see any society developing J2 without having colonized something, somewhere, initially.
If you go sublight, then it's truly a "one way trip" and most probably into a fairly unknown land. The best in planning would be from some previous robotic probes that sent back reasonable data about some "habitability" index for the new land.
Another thing if you go sublight would be to send the colony in phases. The first wave are the specialists and scientists designed to stabilized the situation and make a new world beachhead in preperation for subsequent colonists arriving next year, or next two years.
This gives the colony the ability to establish iteself using the specialists without having to necessarily be distracted by the "real" colonists coming later. When the next wave arrives, they'll either have the colony set up and running, or they'll all be dead or dying, but have lots of documentation as to why and, ideally, what to do about it.
Now, if you have a J1 ship, then you're no longer bound to a one way trip. You can build a ship that should be able to not just make the trip, but get back as well and start making regular runs (as in every few months). In this case, then I think you'll indeed see more of a "town planner" model, simply because it's safest.
A good colony effort should be able to wait the few months or years to get a lot of the unknowns out of the way before the actual colony population arrives. It's simply not worth the risk otherwise.
Also, while the early American colonists struggled in the new lands, technology and "modern" medical knowledge can do a lot to reduce the risk. Through food preservation, nutritional supplements, anti-biotics, etc. As well as simply better gear, and labor saving devices like a chain saw recharged with solar power, a wind generator, or off of the ships power plant. An electric chain saw and an electric powered Tractor will get the land cleared and prepared for crops quite quickly, with little risk to the workers. Not only are they more efficient, they're safer.
While heavy industry is necessary to create such tools, it's not necessary to use them, nor to typically repair them assuming you have spares. And most tractors I've seen are pretty darn rugged and shoulld survive most anything. Generators are pretty reliable as well.
These items may not last the life of the colony, but they'll last long enough to get good use out of them and get the colony going that much faster.
So, IMHO, any :"true" colonisation effort needs to be done at a fairly low tech level. A sublight colonisation effort can be compared to the Mayflower and early American efforts. A J1 colonisation effort can be compared to, say, the Oregon Trail style of colonisation -- lots of pioneers going out in to the wilds, but while remote, they do in fact have civilisation mostly at their back. And colonisation during the OTU would be like colonizing anyplace on the planet today with available air power today, minus instant communications.
The "safest" approach (other than staying home) would be to colonize a system by creating a self-sustaining space habitat in the new system. Then you have the infrastructure to support a long term terraforming program or a detailed planetary analysis. A starfaring culture should already be fully proficient with space based habitats and industry.
At sub-light speeds, the habitat could be able to house twice the initial population and the "colony" begins to function on day 1 of the trip.
At FTL speeds, the empty habitat and cargo modules could be sent at sub-light speed, while FTL scout missions ferry scientists to/from the new system to start the analysys and terraforming (seeding Earth species). The colonists could follow at FTL speeds to meet the waiting habitat.
At sub-light speeds, the habitat could be able to house twice the initial population and the "colony" begins to function on day 1 of the trip.
At FTL speeds, the empty habitat and cargo modules could be sent at sub-light speed, while FTL scout missions ferry scientists to/from the new system to start the analysys and terraforming (seeding Earth species). The colonists could follow at FTL speeds to meet the waiting habitat.
Add to these thoughts some element of "why" - that is what is the motivation for the colony?
If it's got a lot of funding or if there is something there that means continued government support - then phased colonization makes a lot of sense.
If it's a group trying to get away from persecution of some sort, it may be closer to the "one shot's all we have" approach a lot of us think of.
There have been a lot of "whys" for colonization through history - so it doesn't have to be just one - but the motivation will have a big effect on what is considered to be acceptable levels of supply, acceptable risks, etc.
If it's got a lot of funding or if there is something there that means continued government support - then phased colonization makes a lot of sense.
If it's a group trying to get away from persecution of some sort, it may be closer to the "one shot's all we have" approach a lot of us think of.
There have been a lot of "whys" for colonization through history - so it doesn't have to be just one - but the motivation will have a big effect on what is considered to be acceptable levels of supply, acceptable risks, etc.
i would think that a bulk of the colonization will be corporate, and perhaps little more than company towns and long term mining (or oher resource) operations.
In the OTU, a disenchanted group would more than likely simply be able to settle on another populated world entirely, but not have to leave civilization behind. No real reason for them to be completely independent. The game there is simply getting out of whatever situation they're in in the first place. I think there are lots of worlds that would be more than happy to have new folks settling without having to go through the expense and risk of starting a from scratch colony.
Even the most fanatical would be able to find a remote spot on a sparsely populated world if they wanted to be completely independent, but still have a set of guidelines for living on that planet, as well as probably being able to simply use commercial transport to get there.
In the OTU, a disenchanted group would more than likely simply be able to settle on another populated world entirely, but not have to leave civilization behind. No real reason for them to be completely independent. The game there is simply getting out of whatever situation they're in in the first place. I think there are lots of worlds that would be more than happy to have new folks settling without having to go through the expense and risk of starting a from scratch colony.
Even the most fanatical would be able to find a remote spot on a sparsely populated world if they wanted to be completely independent, but still have a set of guidelines for living on that planet, as well as probably being able to simply use commercial transport to get there.
Quite likely.
The main problem, and it's a problem with all colonisation ideas, is why go so far? There would probably be very few materials that would "realistically" be economically worthwhile mining, growing or otherwise producing and shipping over interstellar distances. Manufactured goods would be fine, but why can't they be produced more cheaply "at home"?
Of course the real answer is: because it suits the needs of the story. As with everything else.
Yes.
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
Mostly I agree with the "settle in a remote part of the 3I" routine for the disenchanted. The one exception, suggested by GT:Sword Worlds is a group that sees it's way of living attacked by the 3I. In GT there are Swordies who fear that the SW will be absorbed by the 3I in a generation or two(1) and plan to set up a new home far enough away to escape that.
I guess some Solomanie groups could exist that like the basic "Nobel go home" attitude the Sollies have but dislike the "Humans above everything" attitude and the Mustaches. So those might be another candidate to "hear a tiny voice inside their heads" to use Kipling.
(1) Already split between SW and "Border Worlds" 3I client state with two worlds having "gone Imperial" and the reserve worlds annexed by the 3I
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
Nice idea. An extension would be:
+ Do some basic scouting of a "useful" cluster with 2-5 worlds
+ Send sublight habitate without crew/with caretaker crew
+ Using FTL craft start selection process for the final world
+ Jumping in the path of the habitat fine-tune it's course to the final world
The best way to colonize is send several shiploads of professionals, often paid in land, to do the prep work but this only works with the j1 scenario. Otherwise your best bet would be to load up a ship with 500 families, including kids since waiting a couple of centuries to see your kids again is a bit much.
In both cases, the ship should carry thousands of samples of frozen ovum and sperm of humans and their animals. It is much easier to thaw that cow and then use the frozen ovum to breed it again and again, each time with a different bovine species. Unfortunately, if you don't have artificial wombs, you would do the same with the women of the expedition. I would in fact make it a rule that each woman bears at least 1 random child from the sperm samples, simply to increase the genetic diversity
As for local flora and fauna, you take your chances. They might not be able to use your proteins, but they won't know that and will eat you, just to see if you are worth eating. Bugs will probably take a lot longer to get into things, mainly as they have to generally change speciesm, in either direction.
As for safety, who guarantees safety at a new colony. There is no guarantee of safety even in our modern world, there have been bear attacks in the middle of long settled areas, not to hunters but to people in their back yard. Coyotes are making huge inroads in certain areas, so much so that people are warned not to let children and/or small pets play in the back yard without danger, although the children are probably a bit much. Add in the people who mountain climb for fun, river raft, 4-wheel off-road activities, complete with children.
shipload of professionals ahead to do the prep-work. This can include scouts who arrive and do simple bio-chemical work, mainly to discover those nasty bugs that might be lurking. A larger expedition would be next to set up a small colony with plenty of support from orbit, i.e. hydroponics.
This colony would be highly agricultural, mainly to explore if the planet can be used for normal agriculture.
In both cases, the ship should carry thousands of samples of frozen ovum and sperm of humans and their animals. It is much easier to thaw that cow and then use the frozen ovum to breed it again and again, each time with a different bovine species. Unfortunately, if you don't have artificial wombs, you would do the same with the women of the expedition. I would in fact make it a rule that each woman bears at least 1 random child from the sperm samples, simply to increase the genetic diversity
As for local flora and fauna, you take your chances. They might not be able to use your proteins, but they won't know that and will eat you, just to see if you are worth eating. Bugs will probably take a lot longer to get into things, mainly as they have to generally change speciesm, in either direction.
As for safety, who guarantees safety at a new colony. There is no guarantee of safety even in our modern world, there have been bear attacks in the middle of long settled areas, not to hunters but to people in their back yard. Coyotes are making huge inroads in certain areas, so much so that people are warned not to let children and/or small pets play in the back yard without danger, although the children are probably a bit much. Add in the people who mountain climb for fun, river raft, 4-wheel off-road activities, complete with children.
shipload of professionals ahead to do the prep-work. This can include scouts who arrive and do simple bio-chemical work, mainly to discover those nasty bugs that might be lurking. A larger expedition would be next to set up a small colony with plenty of support from orbit, i.e. hydroponics.
This colony would be highly agricultural, mainly to explore if the planet can be used for normal agriculture.
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
As for dangers: When I was working as a "driver" during hunts the fact that back then I owned a weapons permit(1) I ended up being issued a sidearm (as did other drivers with similar permissions) in case we stumbled upon a wild pig.
As for "Woman required to bear children": This might work when you have a population pressure. Otherwise you might have a serious problems getting intelligent and qualified female personal.
(1) Gave it back when I became a student due to lack of shooting time, currently re-gaining it
As for "Woman required to bear children": This might work when you have a population pressure. Otherwise you might have a serious problems getting intelligent and qualified female personal.
(1) Gave it back when I became a student due to lack of shooting time, currently re-gaining it
Poor Merchant
SOC-7
And if so then this would follow the expansion pattern of Europeans in America, the Dutch in the Far East, and British in India - much of which wasn't colonisation in the strict sense but close enough.
Perhaps I'm missing something here but didn't the Mayflower Settlers leave Europe because they couldn't stomach the backsliding ways of those around them and sought out a location where they could practice their religious fundamentalism undisturbed? I'm thinking that with modern communications it might be hard to find an inhabited world where they could completely cut themselves off from everybody else - here on Earth today China may limit what sites it's citizens can visit on the Internet but it would be hard for them to cut themselves off entirely from the rest of the World. Information and ideas leak in and leak out despite the authorities best efforts.
One thing that strikes me is that there is an assumption that colonies are always set up a long way away - but most historical colonies had a journey time of two to six months. In Traveller the 3I is rather hemmed in by it's neighbours so outward expansion might be rather hard but there are plenty of uninhabited planets within the 3I and no real reason why they couldn't be settled (given political approval etc).
And this would mean that the settlement of these planets would presumably be more like their historical counterparts - a ship or ships landing a group of colonists, providing support while they built shelter, landed their equipment and generally got going and then the ship(s) leave to return home. More ships bring more groups of colonists, additional equipment and the beginnings of trade.
These ships wouldn't need to be large - a Marava class far trader has a passenger capacity of, what, 18 people if you include the low berths? If you have one of these things landing every six weeks then your colony would have a 150 or so people at the end of year 1.
If you look at historical population natural growth rates (I seem to remember they were something of the order of 10% in the American colonies) that would imply a population of 365 people at the end of year 2 (150 from Year 1 + 15 new births in Year 2 + 150 new colonists in Year 2), and some 900 by the end of Year 5 even if you assume only small ships every couple of months. You would also have a situation where 16% of the population is under 5 years old (which would lead to it's own problems).
Given some impetus for people to go to the new colony - desire for religious freedom, population pressure at home limiting the number of children one could have, desire for something more than one has now, I can see a colony growing faster than this given a bit of luck. But what a colony needs more than anything else is a cash crop of some kind - America had tobacco, the Far East had spices, and various places have mineral deposits of some kind. Given that most places within the 3I that were in the least bit hospitable were probably settled long ago then whats left are likely to be the dregs - so getting a succesful colony going is likely to be difficult, but not impossible.
Drakon
SOC-14 1K
Only if it intends to trade with the outside world. If not, then any commodity that is available can be used as a curency standard. Gold is nice, because outside of electronics, it is useless. You can't make a gold plow, or sword. (Well you can, but the combat effectiveness of a gold sword is limited)
If you have an isolationist colony, money is not an issue. You're separatists, what you need with Imperial Credits if you are trying to get away with them.
Have not even finished the thread....sorry. sorta.
Wow, cool topic! I am already working on ship designs and now I have to think of them in different roles and markets than previously. Thanks.
Wow, cool topic! I am already working on ship designs and now I have to think of them in different roles and markets than previously. Thanks.
Similar threads
