Hard Space Redux

[Golan2072]

Your drivetech is up to you and the needs of your world.

I was more suggesting a form factor that fits with the 'vibe' I get from your world- interface craft that is interchangable whether atmo or not and therefore mass-produced, tailsitter cause again no gravitics, 70%+ fuel and engines and little relative cargo.

And don't forget the most important part- limits the landing party to just a few people and just a small vehicle or a few tools/weapons- because space horror needs underequipped adventurers.

Hmm, rethinking this, I'm thinking maybe you have an extra cargo deck in-between the fuel tanks and the engines. Wider base, one 'story' taller, ramp comes out and allows rapid rough field loading/unloading without specialized gantries/cranes or lugging down ladders/winches. That should allow for a mini-ATV in the 5-6 ton range, or aerocycles and a base camp.

10 ton ship = 6-7 tons fuel and engine, 3-4 tons for crew and cargo. I'll have to whip up Traveller/CE stats for "liberty ship" nuclear-lightbulb engines, which are far more efficient than chemical ones, but still require reaction mass.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/surfaceorbit.php#libertyship

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2007/07/gaseous-core-nuclear-design-liberty.html

 

[Golan2072]

For what little it might be worth ...

I just read a cost analysis that suggested that there would never be an economic case for a space elevator on Earth. A space elevator requires materials and technology that does not exist to build something that may reduce the cost to orbit to $25 per pound. The SpaceX BFR uses existing materials and proven technology to reduce the cost to orbit to $35 per pound. Those same super materials needed to build a space elevator would also allow the construction of a better Rocket.

The Space Elevator may have a high “cool factor” but will probably never be the more economical choice.

Hmmm... So, with the closed-cycle "liberty ship" rocket I've linked to below, we'll never need beanstalks?

 

[epicenter00]

The Space Elevator may have a high “cool factor” but will probably never be the more economical choice.

A drop of $10/lb is huge (add in a few 'u's in there). That's a $20,000 savings on a ton. Bulk hauling works on margins far smaller than that. It would enable the profitable shifting of goods that were not previously economical to ship to orbit.

While I have certain doubts if the elevator is actually possible from an engineering point of view, if they were possible and the actual cost of operation (including things like maintenance and lifecycle of the elevator) really allows it to be $10/lb cheaper, the hurdle would be to prove the concept. Once it was proven, elevators would pop up in all kinds of places on Earth and rocketry would dwindle in hauling applications.

Edit: Designs like the Sea Dragon might be a bigger hurdle vs. the Space Elevator

 

[Ulsyus]

For what little it might be worth ...

I just read a cost analysis that suggested that there would never be an economic case for a space elevator on Earth. A space elevator requires materials and technology that does not exist to build something that may reduce the cost to orbit to $25 per pound. The SpaceX BFR uses existing materials and proven technology to reduce the cost to orbit to $35 per pound. Those same super materials needed to build a space elevator would also allow the construction of a better Rocket.

The Space Elevator may have a high “cool factor” but will probably never be the more economical choice.

That's based on our current technology and understanding of what is possible. If nothing else, human history has scattered all over the place (concentrated most recently of course) incidents of technology being developed that appeared or seemed impossible or at the least just implausible only a generation before. So that assessment is likely right for a TL6-8 society isolated from a mainstream galactic civilisation, but may not be the case in 50-100 years from now.

Hmm since Hard Space doesn't have cheap gravitics to abuse, what are some ways one can make it easier to get payloads up to space using it, for like freight or items and such?

Of course, I figure in the future, containers may get lighter due to more advanced materials science?

Like if you're a standard private small free trader crew, what might be the best option here?

In fact, do you think here most adventure player character crews would be more working for small companies than fully being on their own in this setting?

If it's costly to put things into orbit then the question is would it be cheaper to make them up there? Why lift what you can build?

Otherwise I second Aramis' list, with a bent towards skyhooks as a cheaper way into orbit.

 

[atpollard]

That's based on our current technology and understanding of what is possible. If nothing else, human history has scattered all over the place (concentrated most recently of course) incidents of technology being developed that appeared or seemed impossible or at the least just implausible only a generation before. So that assessment is likely right for a TL6-8 society isolated from a mainstream galactic civilisation, but may not be the case in 50-100 years from now.

Granted. However the basic point is that with economy of scale and a high rate of utilization, a reusable rocket has the potential to approach the cost of energy to lift mass to orbit. Any system that proposes to lift mass to orbit for less than the cost of energy has moved from "Unobtanium" to "Handwavium". Beanstalks may achieve parity with Reusable rockets if the Galactic Civilization discovers "Unobtanium" to build it with, however one could then also build "Unobtanium" Rockets that were just as efficient.

 

[Whipsnade]

Hmmm... So, with the closed-cycle "liberty ship" rocket I've linked to below, we'll never need beanstalks?

It's not a question of "need". It's a question of whether they'll be cost effective or not. I've read the same analyses atpollard has and, IMHO, the economic questions are well founded. It's not just being able to build a beanstalk. It's a question of whether an operating beanstalk can earn enough to pay for it's construction and maintenance. Technology is this situation isn't going to be a magic wand. That is, there isn't going to be a tech advance or breakthrough which lessens or removes that economics question. Let me try to explain.

There's a phrase in English you may have heard; "A rising tide lifts all boats". Technology works the same way in that an advance in technology is never used for a single purpose. Advances and breakthroughs in technology "lift all boats". An advance in materials, for example, which helps a beanstalk will also help alternatives to a beanstalk. This means a beanstalk will never the only solution and, as I'll explain, will always be the most expensive one.

Building a beanstalk for Earth means you're building a structure whose center of mass is roughly 36,000 km "above" the planet's surface. That's just for the center of mass, mind you. Depending on the mass of counterweight, the beanstalk could extend thousands of more kilometers past geosynch. The result is a structure whose size is almost inconceivably large. Not only is it that large, you can't use it until it is finished. It's not a road net, rail net, or pipeline where short completed sections can be "working" and "earning" before the entire system is completed. Instead it's a bridge which you can't use until it's completed.

This issue of size means building a beanstalk for a smaller planet or moon is both cheaper and easier. A beanstalk for Mars, Luna, Titan, and so forth doesn't need to be 36,000+ km long. Despite being smaller and thus cheaper, a beanstalk on Mars, Luna, Titan, etc. would have far less earning potential than a beanstalk on Earth. Once again, the money doesn't balance.

Summing up:

• - Any tech advance which helps a beanstalk also helps the alternatives.
• - No matter what, a beanstalk has to pay it's way.

Beanstalks are cool. They're a quick way to impress that We're not in Kansas anymore feeling on the players. Sadly, they don't make much sense even on a superficial level.

 

[wellis]

Thanks to differences in tech here, are there certain jobs/roles and genre conventions in Traveller that would be harder to do, or be non-existent, in Hard Space?

 

[Golan2072]

Thanks to differences in tech here, are there certain jobs/roles and genre conventions in Traveller that would be harder to do, or be non-existent, in Hard Space?

For one, no grav vehicles; cities will resemble modern cities, plus arcologies, rather than the "high-sf" genre-convention multi-level complexes ala The Fifth Element and Mass Effect (or even Bladerunner) built for grav cars.

 

[wellis]

For one, no grav vehicles; cities will resemble modern cities, plus arcologies, rather than the "high-sf" genre-convention multi-level complexes ala The Fifth Element and Mass Effect (or even Bladerunner) built for grav cars.

Stuff like air-taxis/vehicles for the rich would be more like this?:
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-uber-is-getting-flying-cars-off-the-ground/?ftag=CAD-03-10aaj8j

 

[Golan2072]

Stuff like air-taxis/vehicles for the rich would be more like this?:
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-uber-is-getting-flying-cars-off-the-ground/?ftag=CAD-03-10aaj8j

Definitely so!

 

[wellis]

1. Generally for these corporate types, most corporation employees live inside the arcologies, correct?

2. What are passenger ships like in you're setting? Might some of these wealthy corporate types have yachts or something when traveling around? Or would they be the types to be in high passage when going somewhere?

Or maybe high, middle, low passage, etc are all divided more on the entertainment/accommodations available, like most of a trip is spent in VR when traveling around but the VR is higher quality, and the berth is of higher quality the more you pay?

Like what do you figure passenger travel is like in this setting?

 

[Golan2072]

1. Generally for these corporate types, most corporation employees live inside the arcologies, correct?

Yep.

2. What are passenger ships like in you're setting? Might some of these wealthy corporate types have yachts or something when traveling around? Or would they be the types to be in high passage when going somewhere?

Or maybe high, middle, low passage, etc are all divided more on the entertainment/accommodations available, like most of a trip is spent in VR when traveling around but the VR is higher quality, and the berth is of higher quality the more you pay?

Like what do you figure passenger travel is like in this setting?

Travel is expensive. Passage costs are orbit to orbit; you pay more for launch and landing (I'd say getting to orbit is about Cr100 per person, but far cheaper for freight). A typical corporate arcology drone makes Cr1000-2000 a month. In the urban blight surrounding the arcologies you make far less. So even for a better-payed salaryman, a single mid-passage ticket costs as much as 4 month's worth of pay.

So typical people travel infrequently over interstellar distances. Usually a one-way ticket from Earth to a colony, which could easily cost you most or all of your savings. If you have little money and want to get away from the mess that is 2170's Earth, you take the risk and ride in low passage cryostorage - a mere Cr1000 per jump. This means risking death, but for many blight residents the risk is well worth it, assuming that they get a shot to move to a "decent" colony, get a better job, and have clean air and less gang warfare.

Mid Passage and High Passage are similar - you stay awake, you don't risk death from cryogenics failure. High Passage means getting pampered by the stewards, but Mid Passage is not bad either, just a little simpler service and cuisine.

Execs, of course, have their own yachts. Lower-level managers who have to travel either ride Company freighters (which typically have some extra staterooms) or get passage tickets for liners.

People travel for business or to migrate to a colony. Interstellar tourism is prohibitively expensive - just going for a vacation on Arcadia (Proxima Centauri) from Sol will cost you Cr16000 not including getting to and from orbits and not including the cost of the actual vacation. The 2018 equivalent is paying $48,000 travel expenses for a vacation in Europe! Almost no one will travel for pleasure at such prices.

This is why Travellers are unique - they are spacers, people who travel often and travel across the entire human space (and beyond!) as a way of life - typically as part of a starship job or other interstellar job. Or rich (or well-connected) enough to actually go out and see the universe on retirement. Such a life is hardly dreamed of by the average planetbound person.

 

[kilemall]

Got to thinking about a hardcore reaction mass environment.
This is CE/MgT1-HG based right? Some variant of the hard reaction mass rules therein?

I would then recommend going to a 10D jump zero-vee-at-end-of-jump flat 5% jump fuel standard.
Most of the planets are going to be 20000km to 130000km 10D limits, with the very limited sensor ranges and weapon engagement times and 'fast rounds' relative to earlier versions of Traveller mean similar 'decision/firing point' numbers with that standard.
I'd still incur some jump fuel cost just so there is a desperation choice between burning for maneuver or not or damage terror.
You still have limited maneuver choices, just not hours of floating between planet and jump.

 

[wellis]

It's quite simple in my case - if its electronics/cybertech/biotech it's up to TL13; if not, it's TL9-10. Also, no gravitics and no reactionless drives.

Considering the absence of gravitic technology, and the several levels higher TL of electronics/cybertech/biotech compared to other tech in the setting, how might equipment in Hard Space be different compared to OTU?

Is equipment more integrated into single packages or something?

 

[Golan2072]

Considering the absence of gravitic technology, and the several levels higher TL of electronics/cybertech/biotech compared to other tech in the setting, how might equipment in Hard Space be different compared to OTU?

Is equipment more integrated into single packages or something?

Assume more "modern" technological look and feel compared to the OTU or HOSTILE. Expect miniaturized consumer electronics; hardened electronics are bulkier but still very light and compact compared to OTU material. Flat screens, touch screens, augmented reality through glasses or (more commonly) implants, compact drones. Again, hardened equipment which you see on starships and on frontier use will be heavier and tend to have a more "1990's" feel, though screens are still LCD-style and not CRT.

Think System Shock, Deus Ex/Deus Ex: Human Revolution, The Expanse, rather than Alien(s).

 

[kilemall]

Apparently Starfall's method of Hard Space out of gravity well-

 

[wellis]

Is that for a shuttle/interplanetary transport? Or more for a full on starship, kilemall?

Assume more "modern" technological look and feel compared to the OTU or HOSTILE. Expect miniaturized consumer electronics; hardened electronics are bulkier but still very light and compact compared to OTU material. Flat screens, touch screens, augmented reality through glasses or (more commonly) implants, compact drones. Again, hardened equipment which you see on starships and on frontier use will be heavier and tend to have a more "1990's" feel, though screens are still LCD-style and not CRT.

Think System Shock, Deus Ex/Deus Ex: Human Revolution, The Expanse, rather than Alien(s).

Does that mean even more "basic" equipment, like lower end computers, would be lighter than their Cepheus Engine equivalent generic versions?

 

[Golan2072]

Does that mean even more "basic" equipment, like lower end computers, would be lighter than their Cepheus Engine equivalent generic versions?

Non-hardened equipment, yes. Hardened equipment will be closer to the default CT weights, though electronics will still be lighter.

 

[wellis]

Are most military forces out there in space in Hard Space some form of corporate military/security forces?

Or are they mostly mercenary groups or what?

Is there a vetting board ala Battletech's Mercenary Review Board?

Because I'm wondering who it is that patrols the space lanes and colonies, to prevent hijackings, piracy, other corporations muscling in somewhere, etc.

 

[Golan2072]

Are most military forces out there in space in Hard Space some form of corporate military/security forces?

Or are they mostly mercenary groups or what?

Is there a vetting board ala Battletech's Mercenary Review Board?

Because I'm wondering who it is that patrols the space lanes and colonies, to prevent hijackings, piracy, other corporations muscling in somewhere, etc.

Trading blocs have standing militaries. These exist mostly on Terra and to a lesser degree on Luna and Mars. They are typically unwieldy, inefficient, and equipped with older equipment than the corporate forces, but are much, much larger.

Each trading bloc also possesses a small interstellar navy and a star-mobile force-in-readiness, such as the American Federation Marines or the UN Rapid Reaction Force (RRF - also known as the Blue Berets). Their stated mission is to protect the trading bloc's offworld interests, but they often end up called to do dirty military work that corporate SWAT or PMCs (Private Military Contractors - also known as mercs) can't or won't handle. But these are quite small forces - rarely deploying beyond the battalion level, and mostly at the company or even platoon level. The interstellar navy mostly shows the flag around the bloc's flag-for-convenience colonies and does some anti-piracy work.

Most actual military work is the province of corporate security, corporate SWAT, and PMCs. Corporations don't maintain standing armies - as these are unprofitable (unlike selling arms to a bloc's army). They maintain security forces, which are relatively lightly armed. To deal with terrorism, piracy, and well-armed criminals, corporations maintain SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) units, which are the elite of corporate security. Again, these have small arms and light vehicles. No tank formations or strategic bombers here, but rather armored cars, light APCs, and tilt-rotor/vector-thrust aircraft.

For anything requiring a large conventional military force, corporations outsource the work to PMCs. These range from squad-level commando units to whole brigades. PMCs sometimes have heavy weapons, though never at the scale of a trading bloc's military.

Corporations have light security craft for convoy escort duty in dangerous areas, but they usually hire PMC privateers to deal with piracy.