Fission drives
- Thread starter Vladika
- Start date
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Thanks; I appreciate the look up.
Now for the next question (you knew there would be, right?
).Using the optional "Warp Drive". I believe it requires double fuel? If that is correct, for either fission plants, or anti matter, wouldn't it be appropriate to
pay double the fuel cost as there is no weight for anti matter. Or, in the case of fissionable material, just refuel in 6 months rather than a year?
BTW, I'm a die hard CT fan just giving MgT a second look. All help is very much appreciated.
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
Here's something I did a few years ago.
Suggested tables for using nuclear fission powerplants in HIGH GUARD, with TL improvements.
Fission Power Plant Table (percentage/factor-based)
Percent --------TL---------
times 7-9 10-12 13+
Pn 10% 6% 3%
Cost is MCr1.35/dton. Fuel for 1 year of continuous full-power operation (good for 10 years of normal operation) costs 1MCr per EP produced. Fuel volume is included in the powerplant volume.
Fission Power Plant Table (EP-based)
TL dtons/EP Cost/EP (MCr)
7-9 10 13.5
10-12 6 8.1
13+ 3 4.05
Fuel for 1 year of continuous full-power operation (good for 10 years of normal operation) costs 1MCr per EP produced. Fuel volume is included in the powerplant volume.
I have also created a Book 2 table for fission power plants. I based this on my TL13+ fission plant values.
Rating Mass Cost Fuel Cost
A 12 16 2
B 24 32 4
C 36 48 6
D 48 64 8
E 60 80 10
F 72 96 12
G 84 112 14
H 96 128 16
J 108 144 18
K 120 160 20
L 132 176 22
M 144 192 24
N 156 208 26
P 168 224 28
Q 180 240 30
R 192 256 32
S 204 272 34
T 216 288 36
U 228 304 38
V 240 320 40
W 252 336 42/50
X 264 352 44/60
Y 276 368 46/80
Z 288 384 48/120
The costs are in MCr. Fuel cost is also equal to the EPs generated (for HG purposes). The values after the slash for the W+ plants is the EPs they must generate based on their performance.
A civilian-fuel reactor running a starship which didn't need full power all the time would last much longer, at least for years instead of months.
Let's do some math:
We assume the core will last 1 year at continuous full-power operation, or 8760 hours of full-power.
The ship needs full power when in flight to/from destinations, and for one hour prior to jump to charge jump capacitors.
While in hyperspace, the ship need 10% of max power to maintain the jump field, ship functions, life support, etc. I have no idea if this is reasonable or not; does anyone else have any idea?
While downworld, the ship needs no power (connected to a dirtside powergrid).
From the Book 2 tables, flight time for a 1-G ship to/from a size A world is 7 hours, add one hour for jump and you get 8 hours. Using that figure to give us some cushion built-in (certainly not all planets are size-A, and you don't need the 1 hour of full power to exit jumpspace) and assuming 30 jumps a year, we need 480 hours of full-power operations a year (remember, it's 8 hours out to jump and 8 hours in from jump, for 16 hours/jump).
30 jumps a year means 30 x 168 hours (average) in jumpspace, which at 10% of full power is the equivalent of 504 more hours of full-power operation.
Total: 984 hours a year of full-power equivalent needed, which means that 8760 hours of full-power on the core will last 8.9 years.
That's how I got my figure of 10 years duration for normal operation of a civilian starship fission powerplant. I figured there was enough slack in my calculation to allow a "rough" estimate of 10 years. Military ships might get only half that, as I would expect them to spend more time in space and less on the ground, plus expending more energy on things like weapons and screens.
These numbers are based on the data from MT.
Suggested tables for using nuclear fission powerplants in HIGH GUARD, with TL improvements.
Fission Power Plant Table (percentage/factor-based)
Percent --------TL---------
times 7-9 10-12 13+
Pn 10% 6% 3%
Cost is MCr1.35/dton. Fuel for 1 year of continuous full-power operation (good for 10 years of normal operation) costs 1MCr per EP produced. Fuel volume is included in the powerplant volume.
Fission Power Plant Table (EP-based)
TL dtons/EP Cost/EP (MCr)
7-9 10 13.5
10-12 6 8.1
13+ 3 4.05
Fuel for 1 year of continuous full-power operation (good for 10 years of normal operation) costs 1MCr per EP produced. Fuel volume is included in the powerplant volume.
I have also created a Book 2 table for fission power plants. I based this on my TL13+ fission plant values.
Rating Mass Cost Fuel Cost
A 12 16 2
B 24 32 4
C 36 48 6
D 48 64 8
E 60 80 10
F 72 96 12
G 84 112 14
H 96 128 16
J 108 144 18
K 120 160 20
L 132 176 22
M 144 192 24
N 156 208 26
P 168 224 28
Q 180 240 30
R 192 256 32
S 204 272 34
T 216 288 36
U 228 304 38
V 240 320 40
W 252 336 42/50
X 264 352 44/60
Y 276 368 46/80
Z 288 384 48/120
The costs are in MCr. Fuel cost is also equal to the EPs generated (for HG purposes). The values after the slash for the W+ plants is the EPs they must generate based on their performance.
A civilian-fuel reactor running a starship which didn't need full power all the time would last much longer, at least for years instead of months.
Let's do some math:
We assume the core will last 1 year at continuous full-power operation, or 8760 hours of full-power.
The ship needs full power when in flight to/from destinations, and for one hour prior to jump to charge jump capacitors.
While in hyperspace, the ship need 10% of max power to maintain the jump field, ship functions, life support, etc. I have no idea if this is reasonable or not; does anyone else have any idea?
While downworld, the ship needs no power (connected to a dirtside powergrid).
From the Book 2 tables, flight time for a 1-G ship to/from a size A world is 7 hours, add one hour for jump and you get 8 hours. Using that figure to give us some cushion built-in (certainly not all planets are size-A, and you don't need the 1 hour of full power to exit jumpspace) and assuming 30 jumps a year, we need 480 hours of full-power operations a year (remember, it's 8 hours out to jump and 8 hours in from jump, for 16 hours/jump).
30 jumps a year means 30 x 168 hours (average) in jumpspace, which at 10% of full power is the equivalent of 504 more hours of full-power operation.
Total: 984 hours a year of full-power equivalent needed, which means that 8760 hours of full-power on the core will last 8.9 years.
That's how I got my figure of 10 years duration for normal operation of a civilian starship fission powerplant. I figured there was enough slack in my calculation to allow a "rough" estimate of 10 years. Military ships might get only half that, as I would expect them to spend more time in space and less on the ground, plus expending more energy on things like weapons and screens.
These numbers are based on the data from MT.
Thanks; I appreciate the look up.
Now for the next question (you knew there would be, right?
Using the optional "Warp Drive". I believe it requires double fuel? If that is correct, for either fission plants, or anti matter, wouldn't it be appropriate to
pay double the fuel cost as there is no weight for anti matter. Or, in the case of fissionable material, just refuel in 6 months rather than a year?
BTW, I'm a die hard CT fan just giving MgT a second look. All help is very much appreciated.
You can take a look at MgT:2300 too, where fision plants are not so unusual to power the stutterwarp drives (and so fully treated), while they are not the warp drives given in MgT:CB.
Yes.
Seems reasonable to me.
Again, a reasonable conclusion.
Also, you might be interested to know that in the MgT Compendium I, p.124, there is an alternate-rules article for Fusion Power Plant Fuel Consumption.
Essentially, the LHyd Fusion-Fuel Consumption rate listed in the Core Rules on the table at the bottom p.107* is stated in Compendium I to be for a TL-8 Fusion Plant exclusively. Each successive TL brings an increase of fuel-consumption efficiency:
* - i.e. Core Rules p. 107: A TL 8 starship–grade fusion plant will consume two tons of fuel per level of ship drive per week . . .
