Do Air Rafts make Ground Transpo moot?

[Willie Dewitt]

In studying up on Rafts, iconic pieces of Traveller equipment, I see they are far more versatile than I thought. Seems fueling is infrequent (and I think cheap), they are very quiet I assume, travel pretty fast and as the crow flies compared to regular ground cars, and for God's sake they can even get into orbit if you Vacc Suit up.

In my local's regardless of tech level, I've had ground transportation in use as well. Cars, trucks, taxi's (I've even done this in Star Wars related games, btw).

But would there be any? Besides rural ATV or military type vehicles I mean. Just regular people driving cars? Imagine when you drive 75 miles to visit Auntie Betty on the weekend. Raft would turn your almost an hour and a half drive into a nifty 45 minute jaunt. And teenagers seeing a car as freedom? How about something that could fly anywhere? Go make out on a mountain top 100 miles away rather than Lovers Lane out by the woods, and still be home by 11?

For normal people in populated areas, why go the ground car route? Cheaper? Safer? Better hauling capacity? Regulations?

Also, do you explain sky traffic lane regs in towns and cities (not to mention Starports) to your players. Would populated areas look like the scenes in the skies of Coruscant in Attack of The Clones?

Also starting a general Rafts discussion here, as I could not find any former threads on the subject.

WD

 

[Condottiere]

Don't they cost a cool two hundred thousand, making them about a million in today's dollars?

 

[whartung]

Have you seen the price of an Air Raft?

They're not cheap. Certainly not compared to a Camry or a Ford F-150.

So, on an individual level, most folks simply can't afford one.

However, on a societal level, it's perhaps a different issue.

Air Raft require very little infrastructure. Notably, no roads. They need parking, but not roads. And that parking can be on top of things. Or you can visualize high density down town parking being a parking garage without ramps (stairs, but no ramps), just large openings to float in and out of.

Then there's the "how many people actually need one"?

Well, that's a different question. Now we're in the "what about robo-taxis" realm.

In the end, it all depends on what TL the community was founded at. Much like many developing areas today are not stringing phone wires (or even, necessarily, power…), a new community with Air Raft technology simply won't have normal ground vehicles because it's not worth the expenditure to build the infrastructure to support them. Normal folks will likely ride-share with taxis and buses, which will all be Air Rafts. It's not that the taxi companies don't way to buy cheaper vehicles, it's simply not practical since they can't go anywhere.

Lower tech worlds that were obligated to build roads, then the Air Raft will be optional for quite some time, I would think, simply because the roads already exists, though over time the maintenance may dwindle.

 

[flykiller]

iirc in lbb3 they cost 1MCr. so, not for teenagers on a weekend spin. 'course you can set whatever price tag you want.

aside from price the single greatest limiting factor for airraft usage would be traffic control. aerial collisions resulting in hundreds of pounds of metal and bodies dropping onto people's houses would generate calls for heavy government regulation. the lanes seen on coruscant would be mandatory, computer-controlled, and heavily policed. if, of course, airrafts are common. if they are uncommon then they would be treated as light private aircraft are now - limited take-off and landing zones, flight patterns, etc, unless they stay at "ground level" with the rest of the traffic.

as was pointed out in some scifi story decades ago, the biggest effect of universal airraft (or hovercraft) usage would be reduced road construction and maintenance costs. not a small amount of money.

one social effect of airrafts would be that habitations would no longer need direct road connections, but easily could be one or several miles from the nearest road and across any kind of terrain at all.

on worlds without shirtsleeve atmospheres there would be little call for airrafts. most transport inside the habitats would be by elevators, "people-movers", trams, and trains. airrafts would be rare.

 

[infojunky]

travel pretty fast

Slower than a Helo, with a max speed of 120 kph.... Also affected by wind. And a limited flight ceiling without preparation. So weather is a large issue.

For normal people in populated areas, why go the ground car route? Cheaper? Safer? Better hauling capacity? Regulations?

Also, do you explain sky traffic lane regs in towns and cities (not to mention Starports) to your players. Would populated areas look like the scenes in the skies of Coruscant in Attack of The Clones?

Also starting a general Rafts discussion here, as I could not find any former threads on the subject.

Traffic control is the biggest issue with a all flying transportation network.

Then there is the cost of grav vehicles which generally runs a order of magnitude more than other types of vehicles.

Another factor to consider aerial obstructions, which are the major issue with Helos.

Then there is how do you build your cities? In a all grav vehicle society I would expect the Piper model would dominate, fewer larger/taller buildings with numerous landing stages and extensive internal people transport.

The 'burbs would be different with average house being built around it's landing stage. Instead of Lawns as such a apron of driveway instead so there is room for folks to come visiting.

Just some ideas. In my game I include Landspeeders i.e. grav vehicles limited to NOE altitudes only as well free flight grav vehicles. Because Hover Cars are too cool....

 

[Condottiere]

Which is why civilizations tend to develop along rivers; you could have an airboat.

 

[infojunky]

Which is why civilizations tend to develop along rivers; you could have an airboat.

Weirdly that is apt observation.....

Consider Venice, Italy and it's surrounding area.

 

[Condottiere]

Instant transport infrastructure.

And you can build canals if the river doesn't go to where you want it to.

 

[agorski]

What about lifters? They might be cheaper and while you still need the space for a road, you don't need the expensive pavement.

 

[infojunky]

Though I should point out that it is sometimes difficult to get PCs out of their Air/Rafts and into the adventure...

I have heard reports about this topic being discussed by Dave Nelsen and Frank Chadwick at a local con a few years ago.

On related note what do you think of when thinking Air/Rafts? I always go back to the works of H. Beam Piper. Though a related question occurs, how do you feel about short range Gravitic manipulators?

 

[Condottiere]

Maybe a helicopter with a fusion reactor, or a ducted fan variant, or a tiltrotor, they their off the shelf price is considerably cheaper.

 

[mike wightman]

Most overlooked errata in CT:
In LBB4 there is errata which failed to be included in any rules revision to reduce the price of the air/raft and other gear by TL advancement. Build it above its TL of introduction and get a 5-15% discount per TL difference.

 

[aramis]

The air/raft itself doesn't delete ground transportation, but the grav-bus does. The fusion powered grav-bus is, while not cheap, clean, reliable, has few moving parts, and is centrally positive controlled by computer, with self-controlled landing protocols in case of failure, and a pilot console just in case, and is in near constant and automated use on many TL 10+ societies. (MT 101V)

Your busses no longer need roads. BOOM, that clears the streets for bikes and cars. Fusion is too expensive for routine ground, and combustion too polluting, so automated ground systems for local runs (Slidewalks and electric non-personal small cab units) can make the grav bus stops easily accessed. Call the dispatch, it sends a car, which takes you to the bus stop or local destination, possibly hop a bus and take another auto-cab...

 

[McPerth]

Have you seen the price of an Air Raft?

They're not cheap. Certainly not compared to a Camry or a Ford F-150.

So, on an individual level, most folks simply can't afford one.

However, on a societal level, it's perhaps a different issue.

Air Raft require very little infrastructure. Notably, no roads. They need parking, but not roads. And that parking can be on top of things. Or you can visualize high density down town parking being a parking garage without ramps (stairs, but no ramps), just large openings to float in and out of.

Then there's the "how many people actually need one"?

Well, that's a different question. Now we're in the "what about robo-taxis" realm.

In the end, it all depends on what TL the community was founded at. Much like many developing areas today are not stringing phone wires (or even, necessarily, power…), a new community with Air Raft technology simply won't have normal ground vehicles because it's not worth the expenditure to build the infrastructure to support them. Normal folks will likely ride-share with taxis and buses, which will all be Air Rafts. It's not that the taxi companies don't way to buy cheaper vehicles, it's simply not practical since they can't go anywhere.

Lower tech worlds that were obligated to build roads, then the Air Raft will be optional for quite some time, I would think, simply because the roads already exists, though over time the maintenance may dwindle.

I cannot talk about the Striker vehicle design, as I don't have it, but if what I've read here that MT craft design system is close to it, see that on it you can build civilian (unarmored, unarmed, cramped, sensors short) grav vehicles quite cheaper...

With this system, a grav bike can be as cheap as Cr6000 (see my design links in my blog), and an utilitarian family car can be under Cr10000.

I don't know if this can be achieved with Striker vehicle design system, but if they can, ground transport would be limited to situation where grav vehicles are not practical (heavy forested, dangerous climate, etc).

And, of course, bulk heavy cargo transport would probably be cheaper to transport by Maglev networks or ship (though shuttles can be a hard competence in some instances)...

 

[kilemall]

Generally speaking Striker power plants and lifters are oriented mostly towards grav tanks and APCs, I think it can scale down to an air/raft on batteries or fusion power but that's about the limit.

I would tend to go with LBB8 robots as that book has the smaller lifters- more expensive but fits into smaller spaces and less power.

This came up due to my working out the grav backpack, allowing the average combat armor gauss/laser rifle army trooper to carry several hundred kg of equipment/supply with little to no encumbrance.

 

[infojunky]

Most overlooked errata in CT - or any version considering - in LBB4 there is errata to reduce the price of the air/raft (which failed to be included in any rules revision, check the CT price and compare with your rule set of the day).

It dropped from Cr 6,000,000 to Cr 600,000 from the 77 to the 81 editions....

 

[infojunky]

Generally speaking Striker power plants and lifters are oriented mostly towards grav tanks and APCs, I think it can scale down to an air/raft on batteries or fusion power but that's about the limit.

You need to reference the jTas article on civilian vehicles for it to work across the board.

 

[kilemall]

You need to reference the jTas article on civilian vehicles for it to work across the board.

Bleh. At this juncture I'm more likely to roll my own so to speak.

For instance, looking through jet engines TL6-8 in real life, seems the ratio is a 3:1 increase of thrust to weight for high performance per TL. So by TL9 it should likely be 12:1. I think I'm going to cap increases at TL10, so air lifters will still be a thing for a couple of TLs past air/raft intro, but fusion plant and grav performance wins out.

A 1980s JTAS isn't likely to deal in that, the perspective wasn't even there to see what an F-22's engine was going to be like.

 

[infojunky]

Bleh. At this juncture I'm more likely to roll my own so to speak.

For instance, looking through jet engines TL6-8 in real life, seems the ratio is a 3:1 increase of thrust to weight for high performance per TL. So by TL9 it should likely be 12:1. I think I'm going to cap increases at TL10, so air lifters will still be a thing for a couple of TLs past air/raft intro, but fusion plant and grav performance wins out.

Ok, to be honest lower tech aircraft have very rarely been even a consideration in the games I have been in.

But I get your point.

Getting in to specifics of construction I pretty much a non gearhead in my design system requirements. My current thought for vehicles is to steal the second vehicle design system from MgT.If you massage it some it produces reasonable results for smaller vehicles.

 

[McPerth]

Again IMHO, the question I cannot answer (as I said I lack Striker) is, can those cheap MT designs be mimiked in CT by using either Striker rules (even if using LBB8 for some components, as power plants)?

E.g., can this APC or this bike be mimicked in CT this way?

If so, grav utility vehicles will not be too expensive and will efectivelly eliminate ground transport except for bulk cargo and special cases (as told in my former post); if they cannot, ground transport (even light one) will be kept.