High Passage

[Hovtej]

I just completed an eight-day, first-class Atlantic crossing on the Queen Mary 2. I kept comparing it to what I would expect a High Passage jump to be like--formal attire meals and parties, high tea, white glove service, valet service, a Captain's reception, ... . It was a very nice experience, but doing several in a row could begin to wear (and deplete the pocketbook). I do want to compare the QM2's dimensions to a Traveller starliner at some point.

 

[GypsyComet]

I do want to compare the QM2's dimensions to a Traveller starliner at some point.

A box with the QM2's outermost dimensions is just shy of 80,000 dtons in Traveller terms. Taking the curves and shorter above deck dimensions into rough account, the ship is probably around 60,000 dtons, give or take a few thousand.

 

[Timerover51]

I just completed an eight-day, first-class Atlantic crossing on the Queen Mary 2. I kept comparing it to what I would expect a High Passage jump to be like--formal attire meals and parties, high tea, white glove service, valet service, a Captain's reception, ... . It was a very nice experience, but doing several in a row could begin to wear (and deplete the pocketbook). I do want to compare the QM2's dimensions to a Traveller starliner at some point.

Take the Gross Register Tonnage of the QM2, and divide by 5. That will give you the approximate Traveller dTon equivalent. A Gross Register Ton is equivalent to a volume of 100 cubic feet. A Traveller Displacement Ton is approximately 500 cubic feet.

The Gross Tonnage is given on the QM2 website as approximately 150,000 tons, which would equate to about 30,000 Traveller dTons. The RCCL Voyager class is slightly larger, and their newest ships is considerably larger.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

We took a look at a cruise ship at another forum:

http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?p=902054#p902054

I estimated about 15 dT total passanger space per "stateroom" and almost 1 "steward" per stateroom. With dual occupancy, which I guess is normal, we have roughly 7 dT per passenger and 1/3 steward per passanger.

That is about twice the space and twice the stewards of a Traveller High Passage, on average.

I assume First Class on an ocean liner is considerably better than that average.

I would say that what you experienced is not comparable to a regular High Passage, but much, much more luxurious.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Gross Tonnage is given on the QM2 website as approximately 150,000 tons, which would equate to about 30,000 Traveller dTons. The RCCL Voyager class is slightly larger, and their newest ships is considerably larger.

Wiki:

. Note that the units of gross tonnage, which involve both meters and log-meters, have no physical significance, but were rather chosen for historical convenience.

That would make the QM2 closer to 35000 dT, which I would agree is close enough to 30000 dT for a rough estimate.

If we use the rough estimate that we have 14 passenger deck out of a total 18 decks, so passenger space is about 14/18 ≈ 78% of the ship, let's round down to 70% (still sounds high?).

70% of 35000 dT is about 25000 dT shared by about 2600 passengers or ~9,6 dT / passenger.

If we assume that almost all of the crew is "stewards" we have about 0,4 steward / passenger.

Slightly more than the cruise ship estimate, but still rather close. Good enough?

 

[McPerth]

I just completed an eight-day, first-class Atlantic crossing on the Queen Mary 2. I kept comparing it to what I would expect a High Passage jump to be like--formal attire meals and parties, high tea, white glove service, valet service, a Captain's reception, ... . It was a very nice experience, but doing several in a row could begin to wear (and deplete the pocketbook). I do want to compare the QM2's dimensions to a Traveller starliner at some point.

IMHO they are not equivalent, mainly because the very reason you choose to travel in a ship.

In Traveller the ship is the only way to move from one system to another, and so you'll accept less luxury than you could ask for, and more passengers must be fit in the same space to allow for people mobility among the Stars.

In Earth ship travel, OTOH, the one who chooses it is looking for luxury, as if the only reason of their trip was to go from point A to point B they'd choose airplane. In fact, most such luxury cruisers require also a plane to either go to its origin port, to return from his destination port, or both.

To really compare sea ship travel with Traveller Space travel, we shuld go to a time when the plane was not an option, and the ship was relly used to move people, not only for luxury trips where the goal is the trip itself, not reaching the destination port.

 

[Condottiere]

You have to figure out actual interstellar passenger traffic, before building superliners. And traffic would be directly impacted by the cost of that travel, which at four or six thousand bucks at nineteen seventies prices pretty much shrinks that interested demographic to the upper middle class onwards and business travellers.

 

[wbyrd]

I just completed an eight-day, first-class Atlantic crossing on the Queen Mary 2. I kept comparing it to what I would expect a High Passage jump to be like--formal attire meals and parties, high tea, white glove service, valet service, a Captain's reception, ... . It was a very nice experience, but doing several in a row could begin to wear (and deplete the pocketbook). I do want to compare the QM2's dimensions to a Traveller starliner at some point.

Okay went over to Freelance Traveler page in the section on Tonnage
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/shipyard/tonnage.html

The Queen Mary was
RMS Queen Mary (TL6): 82000 Tons Gross = 16000 Tons Traveller
and then found this pic of the two compared

QM2 has a beam ( width) of 135 feet
QM had a beam of 118 feet.
so just a visual estimate... the QM two is more than twice the size of the QM....just a quick estimate would make the Queen Mary 2 around 30k Tons.


Freelance Traveller gave this info for figuring out rough tonnage...

the actual volume of the ship's interior, in "tons" of 100 cubic feet (about 1/5 of a Traveller Ton). This is the closest methodology to Traveller tonnage and converts easily at a rate of 5 Tons Gross = 1 Ton Traveller.
Examples are:

WW2 Liberty Ship (TL6): 12000 Tons Gross = 2400 Tons Traveller
RMS Titanic (TL5): 45000 Tons Gross = 9000 Tons Traveller
RMS Queen Mary (TL6): 82000 Tons Gross = 16000 Tons Traveller
Supertanker (TL8): 200000 Tons Gross = 40000 Tons Traveller

 

[AnotherDilbert]

To really compare sea ship travel with Traveller Space travel, we shuld go to a time when the plane was not an option, and the ship was relly used to move people, not only for luxury trips where the goal is the trip itself, not reaching the destination port.

Good point.

As wbyrd suggests, let's take a look at RMS Titanic, built before air travel was invented. 46000 GRT, 1 GRT is 2.83 m³, so the ship is 130000 m³ or 9642 dT, let's round to 10000 dT.

Capacity is 2435 passengers and a crew of 892.
The ship has 10 decks, of which 8 are used for accomodations. If we round down that is 70% of the ship that is 7000 dT for 3300 people or 2 dT / person. If we assume that First Class take most of the space, Third Class and crew get less than 1 dT / person. Even First Class only get 4 - 5 dT per person. Of course we can add exterior decks to that.

That is quite cramped!

 

[Hovtej]

IMHO they are not equivalent, mainly because the very reason you choose to travel in a ship.

In Traveller the ship is the only way to move from one system to another, and so you'll accept less luxury than you could ask for, and more passengers must be fit in the same space to allow for people mobility among the Stars.

[SNIP]...........

To really compare sea ship travel with Traveller Space travel, we shuld go to a time when the plane was not an option, and the ship was relly used to move people, not only for luxury trips where the goal is the trip itself, not reaching the destination port.

I agree totally. A better comparison for passenger provisions would be with the Titanic launched in 1912 before air travel was an option. (My cruise did sail over the location of the Titanic.) Per Wiki, the Titanic was set up for 833 First Class passengers, 614 Second, and 1006 Third (steerage), plus 900 crew. That is about 1/3 of passengers in First. Judging from the first class passenger list, the movie, and the Wiki description, first class was first class. I think Cunard tried to capture some of this spirit on the QM2. In Traveller, I think nobles, etc would demand a higher level of comfort, especially for multi-week trips, while business and civil service types would go second class or middle passage. Those who had to, would choose third class / low passage. I would expect the passenger mix in Traveller to be similar based on the same economics White Star Lines used in designing the Titanic.

 

[Hovtej]

Similar thoughts at about the same time AnotherDilbert. On the QM2 and I imagine on the Titanic, even the first class cabins were small to allow more space for common areas like dining rooms, etc. There are a couple of "huge" two-story suites on the QM2. A top-end Traveller ship might have something like that to attract higher nobles.

 

[kilemall]

That would make the QM2 closer to 35000 dT, which I would agree is close enough to 30000 dT for a rough estimate.

If we use the rough estimate that we have 14 passenger deck out of a total 18 decks, so passenger space is about 14/18 ≈ 78% of the ship, let's round down to 70% (still sounds high?).

70% of 35000 dT is about 25000 dT shared by about 2600 passengers or ~9,6 dT / passenger.

If we assume that almost all of the crew is "stewards" we have about 0,4 steward / passenger.

Slightly more than the cruise ship estimate, but still rather close. Good enough?

When you are counting passenger space, that is also all the support areas, kitchens, dining, entertainment areas, pools, etc. etc., correct?

 

[kilemall]

Seems to me to make luxury suites work, one needs to charge one high passage per normal allocation, i.e. if one person gets 12 dtons of suite plus 4 dtons of common space, then they pay 4 High Passages.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

When you are counting passenger space, that is also all the support areas, kitchens, dining, entertainment areas, pools, etc. etc., correct?

Yes, absolutely.

In the words of LBB2:

When allocating space within the ship for deck plans, assume that only a portion of stateroom tonnage must actually be in staterooms; the remainder should be used for common areas and other accomodations for the crew.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Seems to me to make luxury suites work, one needs to charge one high passage per normal allocation, i.e. if one person gets 12 dtons of suite plus 4 dtons of common space, then they pay 4 High Passages.

That sounds reasonable.

 

[Timerover51]

Seems to me to make luxury suites work, one needs to charge one high passage per normal allocation, i.e. if one person gets 12 dtons of suite plus 4 dtons of common space, then they pay 4 High Passages.

Take a look at the price differential between the standard inside cabins verses those with balconies verses those that are suites. I have done several cruises on the Voyager-class ships and the maiden voyage of the Freedom of the Seas, and the price differential is quite large.

And do not forget the onboard shopping promenade or the casino or the theater for live entertainment or the ice rinks. All of that would be included in passenger space. Basically, the crew space is all that below or at the water line, while the officers are somewhat spread out throughout the ship. The captain's cabin is directly adjacent to the bridge.

 

[GypsyComet]

That would make the QM2 closer to 35000 dT, which I would agree is close enough to 30000 dT for a rough estimate.

Looking at an exterior plan and side drawing and knowing the maximum beam (and what it measures), and seeing photos that establish the mid-ship cross section, I'm coming up with ~25 kdt just for the central block "hotel", from flying Bridge to radome, roof to waterline. As that leaves another 100m of length to account for, as well as everything below the waterline, I'm more comfortable with 35 kdt than 30, and could see it running a little over that.

As a space ship it would also need to enclose any exterior spaces in common use, including life raft access, which would bump it up a bit.

 

[McPerth]

And do not forget the onboard shopping promenade or the casino or the theater for live entertainment or the ice rinks. All of that would be included in passenger space.

I guess that's what will fall into luxuries category in MgT...

 

[pendragonman]

One major area of this discussion is being overlooked.

All Terrestrial cruise ships have open air decks that are additional passenger dtons that are not possible for starships.

I recommend looking at the Terrestrial cruise ship you have chosen and find the approximate area available in open air (exterior) deckspace, multiply it by either 10 ft or 3 meters to approximate the volume required for a starship to have the equivalent space, then add the dtons this causes to your previous estimates.

While steerage/3rd class still is not terribly comfy it ends up being more than a single dton per passenger.

 

[Timerover51]

The figure of 150,000 Gross Register Tons covers only the enclosed space on the ship, and does not cover the additional volume for the lifeboats, or the open air upper deck areas, which are partially enclosed. That accounts for the difference between my assessment of about 30,000 Traveller Displacement tons verses the 35,000 Traveller dTons that other people are using.

Depending on the port, the port charges are assessed on either the Gross Register Tonnage or the Passenger Carrying Capacity. The Panama Canal has its own computation for Gross Register Tonnage, and assesses passenger ships on their passenger capacity assuming that the ship is maxed out on passengers.