HEPLaR vs Thruster Plates

[djg_p]

I've been reading quite a few differing opinions regarding what some refs and players use when it comes to STL travelling. (I may be bringing up an old topic here.)

In the MT era, it is Thruster Plates with Power Plants that usually have a 30 day fuel supply allocated to the PP.

In the TNE era, it is HEPLaR Drives with Power Plants that usually have a 1 year fuel supply allocated to the PP. (This is before the Alternative Technology.)

In both cases listed above, it basically forces starships to remain relatively close to refuelling points due to the fuel usage involved by their the PP (MT) or the HEPLaR (TNE).

As soon as Thruster Plates are added to the TNE arena, the galaxy immediately becomes a very different place.
Anyone willing to postulate how different it may be?

Food for thought. Cheers DJG

 

[GypsyComet]

This depends on which version of Thruster Plates are in use during the design process. As presented in TNE's Fire Fusion and Steel (FF&S), Thrusters are so bleeding expensive that they change the economics of ship-building utterly. Coming anywhere close to CT or MT ship econ models requires using fractional G acceleration in designs (which I don't have a problem with, per se, but 0.5g free traders aren't the standard...). The costs might be mitigated by assuming that Thrusters, per DGP's Starship Operators Manual, obviate the need for seperate CG systems, but that isn't stated in FF&S.

As for usage, the combination of thruster plates and year-long PP durations cause a number of changes. In-system travel is more likely to be done via M-drive, since you can thrust constantly to mid-way, flip and decel the rest, while HEPlaR fuel usage requires considerable coasting time in which you are vulnerable to emergencies. Thrusters make the depicted naval battles of CT and MT more likely, since you really do need only worry about jump fuel after arriving in-system.