Far Trader cargo/Freight manifest questions
- Thread starter Hal
- Start date
Oh, here's a description I found for a troop transport (found here)
Actual space was probably somewhat larger; the ship in question was 23,788 tons displacement (probably 4-5,000 traveller tons) with 6,341 troops on board.
Doing some quick math, a 'hammock' was roughly 24 cubic feet (0.05 dton), and it's likely that aisle space was less, call it 40 cf total, which should include room for duffle bags. We don't have a description of the mess area, but you should be able to fit a chair and one person's part of a table into ten square feet of deck (maybe 70 cf total) and it's not like everyone needs to eat at the same time; call it another 20 cf per person. Once people have eaten, the tables can be folded up and the area can be converted into an exercise area. 60 cf (0.12 dton) per person!
Actual space was probably somewhat larger; the ship in question was 23,788 tons displacement (probably 4-5,000 traveller tons) with 6,341 troops on board.
Well, you should also account for the fact that a substantial fraction of the ship is not being used for passengers, being necessary for crew (1585 per your page), machinery, fuel, etc, and also that it's likely to be carrying some amount of non-human cargo.
It's also worth noting that crew (as opposed to passengers) can reduce crowding in living quarters by virtue of being on duty part of the time (and thus in spaces that are charged against other components, such as engine access space, rather than against quarters).
Still, less than 0.5 dton/person is likely very cramped, and as long as 2 dton/person is not crippling for ships (which, other than transports, it really isn't) there's nothing terribly wrong with the Traveller size.
I haven't seen anyone account for the real limit on personnel on board a ship in vacuum (AIR!!!)
Sure you can fill the cargo hold of your far trader with bodies slung in hammocks and toss them MREs twice a day. They will still arrive as carcasses because the air handling system on that ship was not designed to handle that many breathing, eating, methane producing bodies. After one week the O2 content of the bay would be near 0% while the CO and methane content would be deadly. Think about the illegal aliens being smuggled across the borders and ports in shipping containers and the back of trucks. Many die because of suffication.
Unsless you are heading into the wilder regions of Vargr space to sell monkey meat on a stick, limit the number of bodies on your ship.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
The trouble is that lifesupport is not its own defined component in CT or T20 (I don't know about MT) Design Sequences.
Well, staterooms are also 4dT in those design sequences. If you're going to change the one, presumably you can change the other as well
Life support is separate in FF&S, but seems to be volume-based, which is sort of weird. Life support isn't normally separate in GT, but it's built on top of GURPS Vehicles so you can add separate life support if you want to.
Drakon
SOC-14 1K
It really should be no big deal to install additional life support equipment. Burners and scrubbers, the devices used to remove CO2 (scrubbers) and methane out of the air don't take up a lot of space. O2 is the big issue.
On the submarines I served on, the scrubbers and burners were about the size of refrigerators. Not even a full dton. The O2 generators were about the size of a large refrigerator, one you might see in a restaraut, perhaps a full dton in size. This was for a crew of about 150, and it was no strain. But, the O2 generators used water, which submarines got plenty of.
On the submarines I served on, the scrubbers and burners were about the size of refrigerators. Not even a full dton. The O2 generators were about the size of a large refrigerator, one you might see in a restaraut, perhaps a full dton in size. This was for a crew of about 150, and it was no strain. But, the O2 generators used water, which submarines got plenty of.
Hello Folks,
After a discussion with another learned individual when it comes to GURPS FAR TRADER, I stumbled across a specific paragrahp that answered my very first question for this thread - namely, how long does one have to deliver the goods from point of origin to destination. Having found that piece of information, I've since discovered that GURPS FAR TRADER, whether intentionally, or unwittingly, wrote out the basis for Jump 1 ships on a commercial level. The pertinent paragraph states in essense:
"The ship has 7 days plus 10 days per two parsecs"
This means that a Jump one ship in GURPS FAR TRADER can not deliver its goods in time for any distance outside of one parsec. The "assumption" being that it takes roughly 10 days per jump - a two parsec jump for a J-1 ship automatically misses the deadline by 3 days. The ONLY way a J-1 ship can deliver its cargo on time is if it takes 1 day to load its cargo, less than a day to get to the jump point, 7 days to travel through Jump space, 1 day to reach a refueling point and refuel, 1 day to reach jump and 7 days to jump. Therein, the ship has 1 day to reach port and unload cargo. Total time: 18 days. This doesn't even take into account the fact that jumps can take +/- 10% of the 168 hours expected.
After a discussion with another learned individual when it comes to GURPS FAR TRADER, I stumbled across a specific paragrahp that answered my very first question for this thread - namely, how long does one have to deliver the goods from point of origin to destination. Having found that piece of information, I've since discovered that GURPS FAR TRADER, whether intentionally, or unwittingly, wrote out the basis for Jump 1 ships on a commercial level. The pertinent paragraph states in essense:
"The ship has 7 days plus 10 days per two parsecs"
This means that a Jump one ship in GURPS FAR TRADER can not deliver its goods in time for any distance outside of one parsec. The "assumption" being that it takes roughly 10 days per jump - a two parsec jump for a J-1 ship automatically misses the deadline by 3 days. The ONLY way a J-1 ship can deliver its cargo on time is if it takes 1 day to load its cargo, less than a day to get to the jump point, 7 days to travel through Jump space, 1 day to reach a refueling point and refuel, 1 day to reach jump and 7 days to jump. Therein, the ship has 1 day to reach port and unload cargo. Total time: 18 days. This doesn't even take into account the fact that jumps can take +/- 10% of the 168 hours expected.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I was rereading the old Book 2 and the new T20 rules and both state that in general commercial ships manage 2 jumps per month, with one week in port for each week in jump. (Then it goes on to state that most other ships follow the same schedule.) This actually makes more sense than trying, with the lack of real time knowledge of scheduling at the port, to schedule tighter than that.
I ran into a new problem though. In T20 the Free Trader costs a whole lot more than in CT. And it doesn't quite break even with a full load under the standard loan arrangement. A Merchant starting with one will be under the 1/240th payment. Any ideas on how to make this work.
I ran into a new problem though. In T20 the Free Trader costs a whole lot more than in CT. And it doesn't quite break even with a full load under the standard loan arrangement. A Merchant starting with one will be under the 1/240th payment. Any ideas on how to make this work.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
Supplement 7: Traders and Gunboats, on page 26, it notes that the A2 Free Trader cannot break even, under those rules (which the books states are High Guard 2 rules).
Basically, the A2 makes money in T20 the same way it did in CT . . . by begging, borrowing, or steali . . . . uh, oops, I mean speculating.
Something to consider:
Each time you change ship building rules, but keep the incomes the same as they were in the original rules - there will be inconsistencies. Also be aware, that different rule sets (such as FAR TRADER) make it so that free traders can't really roam the universe as the rules are currently written. Jump 2+ ships rule in the FAR TRADER universe. The problem is (if you want to call it that) jump 1 free traders only have 68 dtons of cargo space. A Jump-2 ship has 48, and a jump-3 ship has 30 (using GURPS TRAVELLER ship building rules). In a three week period, the J-3 ship can jump 3 times. Its effective cargo carrying capacity is thus 90 dtons relative to the J-1 ship which only has 68 dtons. Oddly enough, the J-3 ship does not cost 3 times as much, but only about 1.5 times as much (I forget the actual figures I came up with).
If - and I say *IF* a ship that could manage to stay afloat financially in the old traveller rules set can't stay afloat financially in the new set, try to find ways to lower the cost of the ship in question until it can do so. Your alternative is to accept the fact that the hull in question can't make it.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Oops I reran the numbers, even with the higher cost the Free trader will come out ahead with full loads. It now takes around 13.5 years at maximum capacity to earn back your 20% down without reducing your maintenance cost.
Under a per parsec model the Far trader with a full load at full jump capacity takes 12.5 years to do the same thing. Under the per jump model the Far trader is short over Cr100,000 per month. T20 doesn't fix the problem either.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Actually "in general Commercial ships manage 2 jumps per month." is a direct quote from book two that was copied into T20.
Hans </font>[/QUOTE]
No it doesn't. It makes sense to jump as often as you can get away with, and with a little organization a turnaround time of 10 days is perfectly feasible. What doesn't make sense is to voluntarily refrain from increasing your income by 50%.
Hans </font>[/QUOTE]
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Canon... not make sense... heracy!
Seriously, it's quite often how you make these things sensible that adds to the enjoyment of this game of ours.
Do you want someone to give you all the answers or do you prefer to reason things out for yourself, perhaps in discussion with like minded individuals on these boards?
I've always assumed this statement applies to the large shipping firms and megacorps which don't have to worry about ridiculous ship mortgage payments, they can effectively loan the money to themselves at a much reduced interest rate or buy outright like government navies.
Small traders will have to jump as often as they can manage to stay ahead of the game.
Large firms have to worry about their profits; yes, they may not be paying banking loans, but they're still expecting maximum return on investment.
If you really want to limit jumps to 2/month, the most plausible explanation would be that jumping without a week's 'rest' is bad for the engine long-term. If a ship is good for 1,000 jumps (40 years) without a major overhaul doing 1/14 days, and only 700 jumps doing 1/10 days (20 years), it's marginally worth keeping the lower jump rate.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Possibly. Just not the way it came out.
Doesn't really matter though unless you are running a Pony Express operation and rotating crews through the ships abd the people you ship for are going to accept things going really off schedule more than two jumps a month consistently doesn't really work without FTL communication.
I don't think anyone was arguing the canonicity of the statement. The argument is over whether this bit of canon makes sense. </font>[/QUOTE]
