Fuel for short jumps

[Morte]

Hi there, I wonder if somebody would be kind enough to help me out with a T20 question since I'm using the Lite rules until the main book gets reprinted. It's pretty simple, hopefully...

If your ship has a Jump-N drive, and you jump less then N hexes, do you use less fuel? In particular, what percentage of normal fuel does a Jump-2 ship use for Jump-1?

 

[sandman]

Originally posted by Morte:
If your ship has a Jump-N drive, and you jump less then N hexes, do you use less fuel? In particular, what percentage of normal fuel does a Jump-2 ship use for Jump-1?

Referee`s call...

but I personally use a pro-rata fuel consumption system.

Ex: Jump 2 takes X dtons of fuel, Jump 1 takes X/2 dtons of fuel.

 

[Richard Saunders]

Hello.
Basicaly it's 10% of the hull tonnage per parsec up to your jump engine number ie jump 2 doing jump 1 10%, jump 2 doing jump2 20%, jump 2 doing jump 3 ship breaks down.
Remember any jump if shorter than 1 parsec it costs the same and takes just as long as a 1parsec jump.
Hope this helps.
Bye

 

[MJD]

Any jump shorter than J-1 uses fuel as igf it were a J-1.

A ship can jump less than its jump number, using 10% of its mass in fuel per jump number.

 

[kaladorn]

Originally posted by MJD:
Any jump shorter than J-1 uses fuel as igf it were a J-1.

A ship can jump less than its jump number, using 10% of its mass in fuel per jump number.

So this has been, over time, a change in canon. I recall a rather clear statement, a quote from Marc Miller in the CT days, in answer to some question about this, that the jump drive was always 'tuned' to burn its rating worth of fuel (J-3 burns J-3 amount of fuel regardless of actual jump distance). There was a protracted explanation included, stuff about drive tuning.

I take it this canon (in that it came from Marc's pen) has been decanonized.... (not that I wouldn't celebrate this - I thought that was an unfortunate viewpoint and the point you ellucidated was more along the lines of my take...).

 

[tjoneslo]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
So this has been, over time, a change in canon. I recall a rather clear statement, a quote from Marc Miller in the CT days, in answer to some question about this, that the jump drive was always 'tuned' to burn its rating worth of fuel (J-3 burns J-3 amount of fuel regardless of actual jump distance). There was a protracted explanation included, stuff about drive tuning.

This was true in the early days of CT Book 2 designs. When the first printing of CT Book 5 came out, it included a device to meter the flow of the jump fuel and allow the J-n takes n * 10% of fuel, not your entire load rule. By the time the second edition of CT Book 5 had come out, the flow meter had disappeared and the rule had changed.

High Guard, (C) 1980 p.22: "Fuel use is computed similarly; 10% of the ship tonnage in fuel is used per jump number used (for the Akron, performing jump-1 uses 1,000 tons of fuel while performing jump-6 uses 6,000 tons of fuel)."

 

[kaladorn]

Tjoneslo, thanks for the perspective and the confirmation. Keep up the good work!

 

[GypsyComet]

The "Jump Governor" question, having gone both ways in official print, is up to the individual Referee. The point of always burning the drives rating in fuel was to make sure the group stops on every world, thus increasing the chances to roll dice and get in trouble for it. If you don't need this mechanic to make your players stop and look (or shoot) at the scenery, then burning fuel based on the jump length works just fine...