Icosahedron
SOC-14 1K
Yeah, MTU is an 'alternative'. It has a large Imperium, but I only play on the Rim. Maybe the 'rules' are different in the interior?
Cruisers in Traveller
- Thread starter jec10
- Start date
Yeah, MTU is an 'alternative'. It has a large Imperium, but I only play on the Rim. Maybe the 'rules' are different in the interior?
Does anyone know if this holds true in modern shipping as well?
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
A quick look around tells me that the larger supertankers cost about $125 million, and carry about $200 million of crude oil (and of course, that cargo value is variable).
I would expect that most cargo ships probably can carry a cargo more valuable than the ship is worth. Whether or not they actually do would depend on what the cargo is, of course. A container ship filled with cheap plastic toys might be more valuable than the cargo, but fill that ship with computers and.....
Ships have always been the most economical method of bulk transportation. It's not surprising that even today, the cargo can be more valuable than the ship.
A Panamax Container ship costs about $100 million and carries about 6500 containers (TEU) worth about $20 thousand per container ($130 million for the entire cargo).
Heresy Warning: Please read no further if you are of a nervous disposition.
<covering ears> Lalalala, lalala, I hear nothing...
I tried using the Merchant Prince rules as a way to estimate interstellar traffic volume/value. It was hard not to notice that the rules were imperfect at best. Apart from some routes just being absurdly profitable, supply and demand for shipping was ignored (I mean, if a route was profitable, wouldn't Tukera have locked it up already?) and someone without any skill whatsoever could make money just by buying and selling goods on the same planet. Realistic, sure, but again - hasn't that position been filled?
Fortunately, I went exploring in the Real World, and I discovered a planet in our system that offers an ideal example: Auzworld.
Said planet Auzworld (all credits Imperial)
* Is a TL 7 desert world with a type E starport, and a population of 20.4 million,
* Has a GDP of BCr306, exports BCr55.6, and imports BCr60.8,
* Cannot meet its own energy needs, and imports much of its high-tech equipment,
* Has a merchant marine capable of carrying 3.0 million Imperial displacement tons of cargo. (Passengers and high-priority intrasystem cargoes are usually carried by space plane, which skews this number significantly,)
* Spends 2.4% of its GDP on defense.
Note that the value of imports and exports are significant compared to GDP, and that Auzworld's import requirements are vital to her economy. An enforceable blockade would hurt her badly.
There will be some necessary apples-and-oranges comparisons made here, seeing as Auzworld's shipping doesn't include its fleet of fast space planes and the economy is presented in terms of GDP, not GNP. However, if we're going to make any kind of sense of the value of commerce raiding, we need to start somewhere.
--Devin
Heresy Warning: Please read no further if you are of a nervous disposition.
IMHO, before Traveller got burdened with the OTU, the rules worked. Characters were meant to work on ships, not own them, and the high price of ships kept them beyond reach. Multimillionairedom via speculative goods is hard to come by if you earn 2k per month and spend 1K on upkeep, and trading across the parsecs makes sense if you have a pocket empire feeding a 'wild west' frontier. I don't think the ship and cargo cost rules were broken until the OTU hit the scene - Maybe that's one reason why the powers-that-be broke it up?
Sort of what I hear India is like: business is booming, but demand far, far outstrips supply. Result: product and land is very expensive, labor is cheap.
It's not just Dan. I'd prefer it if starships (and starship passages) were more affordable too. However, I think it would require a corresponding increase in the size of the universe ('Going 3D' would do it), so I don't see how it can be done without totally changing the TU. Instead I'm going with GT's notion that double occupancy is a common passage type (And in my own TU I have 'steerage' in the form of bunk beds too).
I do suspect it might work out well if the cost of jump drives was changed to 'jump rating squared' megacredits per dT. I.e. MCr1/dT for jump-1, MCr4/dT for jump-2, MCr9/dT for jump-3, etc.
This would make jump-1 more economical and jump-3+ less, making J1 and J2 the natural choice and actually making mains important.
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for Marc Miller to approve that idea, though.
Hans
??? I was discussing German raiders, not U-boats & not the 'Age of Sail'. My point was that the German Raiders caused massive trade disruption out of all proportion to thier numbers, just by existing.
As a side note, heres a link to a news article today discussing the loss of the Australian Cruiser HMAS Sydney to the German raider Kormoran, which was also sunk. Raiders obviously wern't intended to take on Cruisers, but German survivors reported that once escape was ruled out, HMAS Sydney was lured close before the German flag was raised and the first salvo fired.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=61&objectid=10503144
Cheers!
Matt
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Matt
You are right on the money, and are fueling more evidence to the argument that I have been supporting. Bravo.
Nice link, BTW.
Unfortunately, you are finding the point of intellectual dishonesty of Whipsnade's arguments. He has a tendency to ignore any relevant facts you will point out if they do not support his argument.
Just so you know, this intellectual dishonesty thing is something he has tried to charge me with also. In my opinion, he does this when he figures out he may be wrong.
Yep, I have already seen him use the Jedi 'handwave' on one of my posts, but thats ok, theres the fun in pointing it out...
Cheers!
Matt
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
No more personal attacks. This is your only warning.
Right. And now, let's put this thread back on track, please.
I like where the first thread is going, and have so far heard these ways to get this done via ship design:
1. Allocating volume to food stores.
2. Allocating volume to 'farming' of various kinds.
3. Allocating volume to high-quality closed-loop air and water recycling.
4. Allocating volume to repair facilities, machine shops, etc.
The solution which appears to require the least accounting is one where you allocate volume per crew for 'long-range' life support and a percentage of the hull volume for repair facilities.
I wonder if repair facilities are more important than food supply. For example, a year's worth of food supplies are good, and in some cases we might assume that worlds with edibles can be raided to replenish stores. But in some cases, such as sectors and sectors of 'dead' systems, you'll need the more robust, self-sustaining agri- and carnicultures, and staff to manage all that.
Any thoughts?
I like where the first thread is going, and have so far heard these ways to get this done via ship design:
1. Allocating volume to food stores.
2. Allocating volume to 'farming' of various kinds.
3. Allocating volume to high-quality closed-loop air and water recycling.
4. Allocating volume to repair facilities, machine shops, etc.
The solution which appears to require the least accounting is one where you allocate volume per crew for 'long-range' life support and a percentage of the hull volume for repair facilities.
I wonder if repair facilities are more important than food supply. For example, a year's worth of food supplies are good, and in some cases we might assume that worlds with edibles can be raided to replenish stores. But in some cases, such as sectors and sectors of 'dead' systems, you'll need the more robust, self-sustaining agri- and carnicultures, and staff to manage all that.
Any thoughts?
Vast areas of space with no food seems a rare occurrence. The ability to maintain, repair and if necessary rebuild a ship seems more universally necessary to long range/duration 'cruising'.
For a 'Cruiser' I would lean towards heavy on workshops with enough food to avoid constant resupply (perhaps 6 to 18 months of rations).
If indefinite food supply is a mission requirement, then send an auxiliary loaded with food vats as part of the Fleet. The food ship hides from trouble and meets up with one or more cruisers to restock rations once in a while - like the surface ships that tended after WW1 and WW2 subs.
I agree with your points above. In the last (and first) instance, I'm thinking of the Zhodani Core expeditions, which encountered a section of galactic arm where there was no living thing. Probably, on-board foodiculture is critical, since supply lines may be impossible to maintain at these distances. However, their situation is nearly unique.
Icosahedron
SOC-14 1K
If you want to cut accounting to a minimum, I'd just go with adding a percentage to the Engineering tonnage/staff for repair bays and adding a percentage to the accommodations for longer term life support.
Not sure what those percentages would be, though.
Not sure what those percentages would be, though.
Working on the spec of long voyages away from home space (tune in the Star Trek opening theme...)
Decent cargo holds would achieve the stores side, for extended self reliance perhaps allow 1tn per crew per 6(?) months & 1% of volume of PP & Drives for spares & fabricating materials. Crew being crew, no doubt every nook & cranny will be packed full at the start of the cruise.
On top of that I would add repair/maintenance workshop/s, a Medical surgery, an auditorium for Captains breifings & crew education/entertainment, a sizeable marine contingent (platoon?) for ship security & away missions and redundent small craft to allow for inevitable losses.
Not sure I would do the on-board farming, I like the idea but I'm not sure it fits with the utilitarian feel of Traveller ships. Mind you, the Kkree would do it & it might fit well with Zhodani Core expidition ships.
Cheers!
Matt
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Perhaps add another 1 Dton/crewperson for expanded recreational areas and physical fitness needs.
While grain/staple farming might not be a good idea, a hydroponics bay (say equivalent to 1/2 dton/crewmember) could keep fresh veggies and fruit coming. Canned (dehydrated, preserved somehow) is ok for keeping your belly filled, but as any ex-military person will tell you, MRE type food only goes so far. By the end of extended trips to the field, a green salad will give almost any trooper/sailor a morale lift.
While grain/staple farming might not be a good idea, a hydroponics bay (say equivalent to 1/2 dton/crewmember) could keep fresh veggies and fruit coming. Canned (dehydrated, preserved somehow) is ok for keeping your belly filled, but as any ex-military person will tell you, MRE type food only goes so far. By the end of extended trips to the field, a green salad will give almost any trooper/sailor a morale lift.
Generally stored supplies will be a better bet. Not just food, but CO2 scrubbers, water filters and purifiers, additional oxygen and water also need to be accounted for. Plucking a figure from T20 that would be 20 months of supplies for an individual per dTon. Assuming you want an endurance of more then a year then an additional dTon per crew of cargo space would supply that adequately.
The other advantage of just carrying supplies as cargo is that the vessel can drop the supplies if it needs to be pressed to another mission. Stripping out an extensive hydroponics setup may be a different matter.
Veltyen said:
Nah - just stick it in a module. A bay, if there's one free.
I think you're on the same page as subsequent posters. Here's Scott Martin's take:
1. Double the crew volume requirement.
2. Allocate engineering volume based on your needs:
- 5% for a 'C' class equivalent repair yard
- 10% for a 'B' class equivalent repair yard
- 15% for an 'A' class equivalent repair yard
Engineering allocations include volume for materials and machine shops... everything you need to keep your ship going. I'm not sure, but it sounds like a 'B' class yard can actually rebuild your M-drive, and the 'A' class yard can actually rebuild your J-drive. The 'C' class yard can maintain everything (i.e. maybe similar to 'yearly overhaul'?) and perhaps rebuild your power plant and weapon systems.
Something like that.
Anyway, I really like Scott's simplified rules, because they're easy to remember and make as much sense as anything else. In other words, they're at my Resolution of Gameplay (RoG?). And since he's a gearhead, I'm happy to assume that his tidy and simple rules are reasonable, too. A win-win.
Last edited:
