Jump Frame and barges freighter

[McPerth]

That would only be the case if this is a regular feature of the run. If you occasionally need to drop off the barge in the intermediate system, you need the extra barge for those occasions. If you never need to drop it off, you're right. But then, the advantage you gain over more conventional ships is less, since such ships would need to spend time unloading and unloading in the intermediate system either. And conventional ships carry more cargo than you do.

Of course, if you don't remplace a unattached barge (or you attach an empty one) it will be less profitable, as will any ship not runing with full cargo hold. I'm afraid this is part of the busines in any case.

It's not really appropriate for passengers because passengers aren't going to sit lingering out at the assembly point waiting for the ship. Passengers need a tighter and more predictable schedule than freight does. Passengers need a "Leaves on Saturday at 10am" rather than "sometime on Sunday" or "we will tell you in within 24 hours of departure the actual departure time". It's basically crummy service.

In this case, passenger barge may leave at a set time, waiting in orbit for the arrival of the jump frame, but the passengers are already loaded and need not transship, so they won't really care about being unattached, attached in orbit or in jump, they will be aboard in any case.

 

[DaveChase]

The biggest advantage of a "Freight Rider" or Jump Frame is turn around time.

The ship jumps in the staging area is setup right there at the 100D limit. As soon as it has stabilized, it kicks off the modules destined for the system. The outbound cargo modules are waiting for the ship and are loaded up post haste. Tankers fuel the ship in place. The crew, if appropriate, is rotated out and the ship prepared for a return or its next leg.

This saves the whole 100D trip and turnaround, everything is loaded and unloaded as quickly as possible and the ship spends as much time in Jump as it can.

...

I will agree that the turn around is quicker but you still can not assume that you will come out super close to the staging area.
It will still take you hours or a day to get there, which is a lot quicker depending on the star type that could take you days just to get to the planet or mining area.

Dave Chase

 

[SpaceBadger]

It's not really appropriate for passengers because passengers aren't going to sit lingering out at the assembly point waiting for the ship. Passengers need a tighter and more predictable schedule than freight does. Passengers need a "Leaves on Saturday at 10am" rather than "sometime on Sunday" or "we will tell you in within 24 hours of departure the actual departure time". It's basically crummy service.

That depends on how much competition there is for passenger service out of this system. What passengers want may not always be what passengers get.

 

[aramis]

Just realized: The costs for both jump frame and barges are unadjusted for standard designs, not architect fees have been accounted for.

As they need to be standard designs for the whole concept to work, prices (and so maintenance and mortgages must be reduced by 9%.

EDIT: Edited now, as well as fixed the passenger barge cost (I botched it). Now they should be correct, to the mest of my knowledge and intent (if I didn't fail in anything else)

Standard designes usually don't include the architect's fee in the design cost. A couple good reasons why, too:

1) you have to have the plans before applying to the bank
2) the yard already has copies
3) the bank already has copies
4) someone has leaked the plans to the public many times

Now, as for LASH...

if using T5, or CT with Bk6, or any other extended system gen option... many worlds are more than a few hours from the jump exit point. Some are well over a week in and out each.

This is the regime in which LASH thrives... Jump frame enters system, is met by a fuel barge and ready outbound lighters; inbound lighters head in. If need be, crew swaps are on another lighter.

And about 1/5 of the worlds in the marches are within their primary's stellar 100 diameter limit.

 

[mike wightman]

I've noticed over the years that many people have come up with something similar to the LASH system.

Now since the trade rules in CT were designed for tramp traders speculating it makes me think the bulk trade between worlds on the major trade routes in the OTU probably is by LASH type systems.

The other likely setting element is that large deep space trade stations are the destination for jump ships, with in-system ships moving backwards and forwards to the worlds in the system.

 

[McPerth]

Excuse me, but what LASH stands for?

 

[Vladika]

Lighter Aboard Ship

 

[pendragonman]

Hey Carlobrand,

have you worked up your jump spine and barge system for T5 yet? Perhaps that with a decent write up might be a useful T5 teaching tool and "standardized ship" for easy new GM use.

 

[Brandon C]

(performs thread necromancy)

Okay, some initial thoughts:

On the jump frame, I'm not sure that you need a 2,000 ton hull. Wouldn't a 400 ton distributed hull with clamps for 1,600 tons of barges work?

The cargo barge probably needs repair drones if there are no humans aboard. Also, I would consider adding one stateroom for a human crew if a situation might require one. This only costs 6 tons of cargo space. Making the bridge compact is also an option.

That's a lot of stewards on the passenger barge. Does that assume a maximum number of steward if only high passengers are carried in the staterooms? I think with the luxuries you don't need as many.

A similar concept I had for GT a few years ago on another site:

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=98341

(the thread devolved into a piracy debate fairly quickly, so there's not much you have to read beyond the first two posts)

 

[McPerth]

Okay, some initial thoughts:

On the jump frame, I'm not sure that you need a 2,000 ton hull. Wouldn't a 400 ton distributed hull with clamps for 1,600 tons of barges work?

All the numbers must be done with the ship fully loaded (with the 8 barges on it) for the idea o work. That's the same as a Tender incluiding the tonnage of the Riders, or a Carrier that of the Fighters.

The barges are subcrafts, even if the frame may work independently (except for the fuel, as it carries no enough of it for a single jump)

The cargo barge probably needs repair drones if there are no humans aboard. Also, I would consider adding one stateroom for a human crew if a situation might require one. This only costs 6 tons of cargo space.

The repair drones fo the barge are thought for the whole combo. IMHO this has some advantages:

• centralizes the drones, allowing all of them to act where needed (no real game effect)
• allows the barges to use their whole volume (though it's only 2 tons, they are better used for other pourposes on them)
• avoids the barges to need a computer capable to handle an auto-repair program

That's a lot of stewards on the passenger barge. Does that assume a maximum number of steward if only high passengers are carried in the staterooms? I think with the luxuries you don't need as many.

In MgT, to care for 30 High Passengers you need at least 15 steward skill levels (counting 0s) The 2 tons of luxuries add 2 skill levels, but that still means you need 7 of them assuming an average skill level of 1.

Also, having at least 6 stewards means you can work in 3 shifts, expecting that some among the 30 will be quite pesky (after all, they pay good money for good service). You can, though, expect in some cases to have less crew (e.g. if a Steward can also double as Medic or Enginner).

A similar concept I had for GT a few years ago on another site:

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=98341

(the thread devolved into a piracy debate fairly quickly, so there's not much you have to read beyond the first two posts)

It seems interesting too, and really a similar idea. I've never set my eyes in GT, so I guess some requirements are different...

 

[wbyrd]

I had an idea for a series of way points using a tow vessel, and pre-staged modules. the modules are assembled into "trains" ahead of time, the tow vessel arrives, detaches modules for that Stop, wile being refueled by a tender.

the tow vessel spends only a day or two in system, and then departs. I built the tow vessel using docking clamps, and modules that docked in a chain to one another.using a special towing rig that allowed the ship to treat the individual modules as a single object. I think it adds a a bit to the total tonnage..and was a bit pricey...

th advantage being that the tow ship could be well armed, and protected, if attacked it could detach from the chain of modules and had high combat performance for a cargo ship...since it's engines, and power plant were rated for towing several thousand tons of cargo in addition to the main hull.

Once the tow ship detached from the train it could be a match for an ambush frigate one on one.

 

[Brandon C]

All the numbers must be done with the ship fully loaded (with the 8 barges on it) for the idea o work. That's the same as a Tender incluiding the tonnage of the Riders, or a Carrier that of the Fighters.

The barges are subcrafts, even if the frame may work independently (except for the fuel, as it carries no enough of i for a single jump)

What I mean is, shouldn't the frame be 400 tons with clamps for 1,600 tons of carried craft. Performance would, of course, be calculated as if it were 2,000 tons.

There are some differences, such as the hull cost for 400 and 2,000 tons, the size and cost of the bridge, and a few other things.

The repair drones fo the barge are thought for the whole combo. IMHO this has some advantages:

• centralizes the drones, allowing all of them to act where needed (no real game effect)
• allows the barges to use their whole volume (though it's only 2 tons, they are better used for other pourposes on them)
• avoids the barges to need a computer cabapble to handle an auto-repair program

Hmm, I suppose that's okay. I'd just prefer to have the drones on the barges full time.

In MgT, to care for 30 High Passengers you need at least 15 steward skill levels (counting 0s) The 2 tons of luxuries add 2 skill levels, but taht still means you nees 7 of them assuming an average skill level of 1.

Also, having at least 6 stewards means you can work in 3 shifts, expecting that some among the 30 wil lbe quite pesky (after all, they pay good money for good service). You can, though, expect in some cases to have less crew (e.g. if a Steward can also double as Medic or Enginner).

Do you really think you'll have that many high passengers per trip? Middle passengers seem more likely.

It seems interesting too, and really a similar idea. I've never set my eyes in GT, so I guess some requirements are different...

Briefly, the major differences are:

* streamlining cuts space by 20% (this was an artifact of GURPS Vehicles rules)
* volume and mass of components are treated separately
* acceleration is based on thrust of the M-drives divided by ship mass

 

[McPerth]

I had an idea for a series of way points using a tow vessel, and pre-staged modules. the modules are assembled into "trains" ahead of time, the tow vessel arrives, detaches modules for that Stop, wile being refueled by a tender.

the tow vessel spends only a day or two in system, and then departs. I built the tow vessel using docking clamps, and modules that docked in a chain to one another.using a special towing rig that allowed the ship to treat the individual modules as a single object. I think it adds a a bit to the total tonnage..and was a bit pricey...

th advantage being that the tow ship could be well armed, and protected, if attacked it could detach from the chain of modules and had high combat performance for a cargo ship...since it's engines, and power plant were rated for towing several thousand tons of cargo in addition to the main hull.

Once the tow ship detached from the train it could be a match for an ambush frigate one on one.

I see your concept quite similar too, though, for what you say, more military oriented.

See in any case that by designing (not too difficult) some armed and well armored (or fighter carrying) barges, it could be used as a "mini tender" and be quite powerful in combat too...

What I mean is, shouldn't the frame be 400 tons with clamps for 1,600 tons of carried craft. Performance would, of course, be calculated as if it were 2,000 tons.

There are some differences, such as the hull cost for 400 and 2,000 tons, the size and cost of the bridge, and a few other things.

I guess it could also be done. Maybe I was just too influenced by the fact in most tenders (or similars) things are calculated for the whole loaded ship, tenders included (something not done in tugs, as they are more universal-helping ships)...

Hmm, I suppose that's okay. I'd just prefer to have the drones on the barges full time.

And what use will they have when the computer will not support the auro-repair programs?

The main difference among repair drones and the robots shown in page 95 og MgT:CB is precisely that the repair drones are computer dependent (OTOH they can use any skill he computer has, not only their limited skill set as independent robots. It was discussed in this thread).

Do you really think you'll have that many high passengers per trip? Middle passengers seem more likely.

Probably not according CB trade rules, but those are thought for tramp freighters without scheduled routes.

At J4 capability, you can be quite picking in your ports of call, and I guess that scheduled routes will attract more passengers.

See that this is not intended as a player's ship, but as a background one for scheduled lines (more alike the Al Morai corporation shown in SMC, whose 3000 dton, J4 ships, BTW, had 30 passengers capacity too, BTW)

 

[Brandon C]

I guess it could also be done. Maybe I was just too influenced by the fact in msot tenders (or similars) tings are calculated for the whole loaded ship, tenders included (sonemting not done in tugs, as they are more universal-helping ships)...

Some might argue with eight 200 ton ships clamped on to a 400 ton hull, but since it's a 400 ton distributed hull, I can picture such an arrangement.

And what use will they have when the computer will not support the auro-repair programs?

Given the cost of ship computers in MgT, I see no reason not to install at least a Model 2 in most ships and possibly a Model 3 in larger ship even with Jump-1 or no jump.

Probably not according CB trade rules, but those are thought for tramp freighters without scheduled routes.

Perhaps a high passage barge, with no low berths, and a middle/low passage barge, with fewer stewards?

The high passage barge could combine staterooms into suites and use several briefing rooms to represents a bar, restaurant, theatre and/or casino. You may even toss in a medical lab to represent something better than the standard starship sickbay.

See that this is not intended as a player's ship, but as a background one for scheduled lines (more alike the Al Morai corporation shown in SMC, whose 3000 dton, J4 ships, BTW, had 30 passengers capacity too, BTW)

I could see an arrangement where the barges are independently owned (making it a possible PC ship) and the owner/captain buys passage on a jump frame.

 

[McPerth]

Given the cost of ship computers in MgT, I see no reason not to install at least a Model 2 in most ships and possibly a Model 3 in larger ship even with Jump-1 or no jump.

This (along with the drones be in each barge) would be a must if the frame is only rated 400 dtons, as the repair drones will only be for this volume.

But, while computers ae cheap, software is not (an auto repair/1 program costs MCr 5, and that's nearly 1/6^th of the cargo barge's cost or 1/10^th of the passenger barge's

Perhaps a high passage barge, with no low berths, and a middle/low passage barge, with fewer stewards?

The high passage barge could combine staterooms into suites and use several briefing rooms to represents a bar, restaurant, theatre and/or casino. You may even toss in a medical lab to represent something better than the standard starship sickbay.

Something to consider. While I only envisioned 2 kinds of barges initially (to keep it asstandarized as posible), many kinds are posible (as said before, incluiding military thought ones)

I could see an arrangement where the barges are independently owned (making it a possible PC ship) and the owner/captain buys passage on a jump frame.

Interesting thought, for well established regular lines...

What would be the fee for this transport (so that both, the frame and barge owners have some profit)?

 

[Brandon C]

Interesting thought, for well established regular lines...

What would be the fee for this transport (so that both, the frame and barge owners have some profit)?

You'd need to figure the biweekly (two week*) cost of operations for the jump frame and barges. This includes fuel, crew, maintenance, life support and mortgage. Since the jump frame carries eight barges, it would divide this cost by eight. This would break even, so for a profit the jump frame has to charge anywhere from 5-30% more. To get an idea on how much the barges can afford to pay, figure their costs and then revenue for passengers and freight carried (I use 75% capacity, but a barge might need to fill more space). p.137-138 covers most expenses and the Trade chapter covers most revenues. Yes, this can get complicated, but that's what spreadsheets are for

Oh, the passenger barges need cargo space -- 1 ton per high passenger. The luggage allowance required for middle and low passengers can be considered part of the stateroom/low berth space.

* Aside from the week in jump space, the jump frame has to refuel and have maintenance performed and either the crew swapped out or R&R for the crew, and organizing the next eight barges and attaching them, which I put at another week for ease of calculations.

 

[wbyrd]

I see your concept quite similar too, though, for what you say, more military oriented.

See in any case that by designing (not too difficult) some armed and well armored (or fighter carrying) barges, it could be used as a "mini tender" and be quite poserful in combat too...

More along the line of a self escorting Merchantman. The entire idea was that it could carry extremely heavy cargoes without the need for a dedicated escort vessel if it were moving through poorly patrolled areas.

although now that you mention it it could make an excellent mini-tender carrying armed non jump capable craft, fuel cells,and support pods instead of cargo.

it wouldn't be in the carrier class by a long shot, but it could carry enough of a force to establish a short term patrol of an area or drop off a garrison force to establish patrols in key areas.

For that matter any jump frame shi could be pressed into support duty as a Jeep carrier or armed merchantman in a pinch....as long as it could keep out of fire. I imagine most commercial vessels rigged for Jump ferry duties would not have the sort of set up needed to survive combat.

the one universal trait any tow vessel would have is that when free of their cargo they would all have high acceleration/jump range. Due to their engines being rated for the total tonnage they would have hen fully loaded.

Hmm someone earlier mentioned a mining set up that formed it's product into a solid billet of metal with attachment points...with a set up like that the Jump Frame could carry cargo one way making several short jumps, then return empty making fewer much longer range jumps.

If the Jump frame was fitted with hook up for drop tanks it could conceivably make the return trip to a mine or processing plant faster than it made the run to deliver the mines scheduled delivery of material.

Perhaps carrying one or two small cargo pods for passengers and supplies, on the return trip. With that sort of set up I can see commercial mining operations, or factories set up near the source of materials, using a jump frame for logistics support, and delivery...

They would save a lot on fuel, since the ship would be much "smaller" o the return trip. Burning less fuel, and making longer jumps to increase the number of trips it could make over a conventional cargo ship with integral cargo holds.

 

[Condottiere]

I like Heighliners, or at least the concept shown in the movie.

 

[wbyrd]

I like Heighliners, or at least the concept shown in the movie.

Yeah me TOO ..I had to give one a try....still cant quite get textures of my own to work right.

 

[Patron Zero]

Using jump frame type transports would also have a trickle down effect for those whom operate in-system freight haulers, said barges once arriving would need 'local' tugs to move such to their particular destinations.

I see a lot of owner-operators on the 'local' side of that arrangement but the actual jump barges likely being operated by conglomerates and other business-related syndicates.

And not to overlook that the Union is going to get a percentage of everything that passes through their hands of their workers.

"Lemme explain somethin' to ya, sonny boy. Nothin' moves off these docks without it don't get loaded by the union. I don't see no union people around here. Do you?"