• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

LASH Tender

Pwyll

SOC-12
not sure if i have a useful design here...
any suggestions?


LASH Tender (LBB2)
designed to deploy one streamlined 800 ton lighter
2000 ton
Jump-1
32 months
Unstreamlined
TL 11
MCr 483.4 (full price)
Crew: 2 command, 3 admin, 1 pilot, 1 navigator, 3 engineers, 1 medic, 9 gunners
Drives: jdrive-J, mdrive-J, pplant-J. 1 parsec jump range, 1g manuever
Bridge: model/2 computer, 9 hardpoints, 9 triple turrets (beam,missile,sand)
Fuel: 820 tons (4 jumps and 56 days endurance)
11 staterooms (double occupancy)
95 tons cargo, 800 ton lighter bay, 95 ton shuttle
 
basic lighter
800 ton
Jump-0
28 months
Streamlined
TL 9
MCr 136.6 (full price)
Crew: 1 pilot, 1 engineer
Drives: mdrive-D, pplant-D. 1g manuever
Bridge: model/1 computer, 8 hardpoints
Fuel: 10 tons (28 days endurance)
2 staterooms
733 tons cargo

the pilot could be replaced by a medic during interstellar deployment.
 
not sure if i have a useful design here... any suggestions?
Well, since you ask, I think the Tender has to be much larger, 5000t at least in order to carry more lighters and maybe a jump2 varient in order to open up more trade routes without having to make deep-space jumps.
Why has your lighter got a Jump rating?
While on the subject of the lighter, a 1000t lighter wouldn't "waste" bridge space and could carry more cargo or whatever.
Anyway, thanks for the designs
.
 
Why has your lighter got a Jump rating?
good question Sigg
yet another typo.

i use these hulls to keep the tech levels low. low jump ratings keep costs down.

suggestions noted and appreciated


this one i designed sort of like a delivery van, i guess.

thanks for the input
 
Um, I don't understand the Jump drives either. A tender wouldn't have a Jump drive would it? And a lighter just goes between orbit and a planet, doesn't it? I guess the X-Boat Tender has a Jump-1 drive, so that does make sense.

Just wondering...

Scout
 
Originally posted by Dameon Toth Detached Scout:
Um, I don't understand the Jump drives either. A tender wouldn't have a Jump drive would it? And a lighter just goes between orbit and a planet, doesn't it?
The deal here is that the tender is the thing that carries the lighter(s) through jump space. It hangs about in orbit (probably refuelling) while the lighter runs down to the surface and back. Then, the lighter docks with the tender, and the combination jumps again. There is no transfer of cargo between the lighter and tender, as essentially the lighter is a flying cargo container, or a frame that allows a cargo container to fly.

The whole deal is maximise modularity, to speed up turn around time, and just generally take advantage of the fact that time is money.

It's kind of a civilian equivalent of the military battle rider concept.

Alan B
 
Except, that I forgot the most important part:

You swap the lighters at each world. That way, all you have to do is drop off your current lighter, and pick up the new one that is waiting for you, and you are ready to jump again, without all the hanging about getting to and from the mainworld, loading cargo, and so on.

Hmm... maybe you need the lighter to bring jump fuel for you as well...

Alan B
 
Ah - that makes sense. I posted a request for something like this a few weeks ago for getting ships through a rift in my Empty Hexes post.

Cool!

Scout
 
well i went thru several designs...
this was the most economically viable LBB2 LASH-style design i came up with, and certainly the most accessible :cool:

turnaround time could be as low as 8 days:
7 days in jumpspace
1 watch to port
1 watch to refuel, inspect drives, and swap pods
1 watch to jumppoint

turnaround time of 8 days would allow 43 jumps per year instead of the normal 25.

combined qty cost 26.72 MCr
=======================================
carrier
100 ton
9 months, Streamlined, TL 9
MCr 30.7 (full price)
MCr 24.56 (qty price)
Crew: 1 pilot, 1 engineer, 1 medic
Drives: jdrive-A, mdrive-A, pplant-A. 2g manuever, 2 parsec jump.
Bridge: model/1bis computer, 1 hardpoint, 1 ton reserved for fire control
Fuel: 30 tons (2 parsec range, 14 days endurance)
4 staterooms, 17 tons cargo
(this is essentially a scout with some stuff left off, and fittings for the pod. it still runs just fine on unrefined fuel tho.)
=======================================
pod
100 ton
9 months, Streamlined, TL 7
MCr 2.7 (full price)
MCr 2.16 (qty price)
1 hardpoint
100 tons cargo (customizable)
(basically an empty hull)
 
Nice design
.
I take it that carrying the pod drops the performance to j1,m1.
One problem though is you will need a ship to carry the pod to the world.
A lighter is meant to be self powered and there lies the problem. It means another bridge. So here is my solution.

tender, TL11
1000t hull
drives:95t
jdrive K (2),mdrive E (1),powerplant K (2)
220tfuel
20t bridge, 1bis comp
12 staterooms-crew: pilot, navigator, medic, 3x engineers
16t to allocate (fire control, extra staterooms, cold berths etc)
base cost: 316 MCr

Now for the fun bit. You'll notice there is 500t spare and the jdrive is j2.
I propose this Tender carry either:
1 500t lighter, or
3x 500t lighters, or
1 500t lighter + 1 1000t lighter, or
1 1500t lighter
 
Mr Whipsnade,
thank you for the link
. The Jump Pod deckplans are excellent and it's going to take a while to read through all of the other good stuff there.
I hadn't finalised the designs for the lighters so here they are now.

TL9 500t lighter, streamlined hull
20t bridge, model 1 comp
drives: 15t, m C(1), pp C(1)
10t fuel
1 stateroom, crew: pilot, engineer (the Tender has extra staterooms for the lighter crews)
450t cargo
base cost 96 MCr

TL10 1000t lighter, streamlined hull
20t bridge, model 1 comp
drives: 25t, m E(1), pp E(1)
10t fuel
crew: pilot, engineer; 1 stateroom
940t cargo
base cost 177.5 MCr

TL11 1500t lighter, streamlined hull
30t bridge, model 1 comp
drives: 45t, m J(1), pp J(1)
10t fuel
crew: pilot, 2x engineers; 1 stateroom
1410t cargo
base cost 283 MCr

The cheapest combination is 1 500t and 1 1000t lighter. Most cargo is 1 1500t lighter. Most versatile is probably 3x 500t.
 
Sigg Oddra wrote:

"The Jump Pod deckplans are excellent and it's going to take a while to read through all of the other good stuff there."


Mr. Oddra,

Mr. Smith has certainly created some wonderful Traveller stuff for Our Olde Hobby. I use his naval supply rules IMTU, they're easy to implement and are very plausible IMH ex-USN O. Be sure to check out his AARs too. Mr. Smith is a long time contributor to the 'ct-starships' group and the AARs are replays of various design speculations.

"I hadn't finalised the designs for the lighters so here they are now."

Very nice indeed! Loads of adventuring possibilities for GMs. We know that worlds and other bodies subsidize merchant shipping in the OTU. The LASH-style tenders you and Mr. Pwyll are discussing would make great 'subbies'. Their cargo loads and storage styles can easily be adjusted for the individual requirements of each layover, almost like the 'manifest' of a railroad train!

Containerized frieght shipping will also allow smaller firms to 'get into' the import/export business, jsut as it has done here on Earth.


Sincerely,
Larsen
 
Sigg,
Nice design
thanks

One problem though is you will need a ship to carry the pod to the world.
in my 100 ton design, the scout ports (landing on the planet if that is called for) with the pod attached, passages disembark, and a ground crew takes over to swap the pods, inspect engines and refuel. then a relief crew could take the ship to the next stop on its route. excellent support is the major key to the reduced turnaround time.

economics aside, i like your design, it has a sort of "sleek" feel to it.

have you performed an economic analysis for the your lighters? seems like maybe the duplication of equipment and personnel would hurt their profit margin considerably. that is what i found, anyway, when analyzing my designs.
with a cost of 228,376 Cr per ton of carrying capacity and a downpayment of 5.344 MCr, the 100 ton design is not only viable, but very accessible as well. liability is low, with a total equipment cost of only 26.72 MCr at risk in any one jump.

424,822 Cr per ton of ton of carrying capacity for the 1000 ton LASH design is not bad, but a 2000 ton bulk freighter could only cost 250,625 Cr per ton of ton of carrying capacity. for comparison with canon ships, a fat trader comes in at 388,461, a free trader runs 294,285, a liner is 849,354.

the 1000 ton LASH design downpayment of 119.8 MCr is certainly accessible to sizeable governments and corporations, but less well-funded entities will be unable to afford it.

the risk of losing investment is small but definite. insurance might be problematic, considering that a 2000 ton bulk freighter could cost only about 400 MCr, whereas the 1000 ton LASH design costs 599 MCr in the configuration i analyzed.
 
I have just created a CT Bk2 LASH tug and lighters, with an economic analysis, and I find my numbers to be a little unbelieveable, so I am posting my work here for others to check. Frankly, this ship makes too much money.


Book 2 1000-ton LASH (Lighter Aboard SHip) tug (type TL)

A classic example of the LASH (Lighter Aboard SHip) concept, where a tug carries other non-jump-capable vessels through jump, the type TL uses a custom 1000-ton unstreamlined hull. Mounting jump drive-W, maneuver drive-W, and powerplant-W, the tug is capable of jump-5 and 5-Gs acceleration by itself, jump-2 and 2-G acceleration carrying a single 1000-ton lighter, or jump-1 and 1-G acceleration carrying two, three or four 1000-ton lighters. The tug's onboard fuel tankage of 550 tons supports all these drive/load combinations without any external fuel sources. A Model/5 computer is installed next to the tug's bridge.

As is typical of LASH designs, which are intended to spend most of their time in jump, each of the 10 people in the crew have individual staterooms. This design also allows the lighter crews to live aboard the tug, and there are also individual staterooms provided for them, giving 26 staterooms altogether. An additional 26 displacement tons of space has been given over to additional crew space, including a recreation room, workshops, and a small sauna. The tug has 50 tons of cargo space to be used for ship's supplies, allowing for long-duration operations without resupply. A 30-ton ship's boat is carried to serve as a liberty craft and general support boat.

The type TL costs MCr641, which does not include any lighters.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Type TL specifications: tonnage MCr
Hull (1000 tons, 1000 100
unstreamlined)
Jump Drive W 110 210
M-Drive W 41 84
Powerplant W 64 168
Fuel 550
Bridge 20 5
Mod/5 computer 5 45
26 staterooms 104 13
Ship's boat 30 16
Cargo/supplies 50
Rec space 26
Totals 1000 641</pre>[/QUOTE]Book 2 LASH 1000-ton lighter (Type LH)

Intended to be "self-propelled cargo bays" for the Type TL tug vessel, the type LH lighter is build on a standard 1000-ton streamlined hull. Mounting maneuver drive-E and powerplant-E, the lighter is capable of 1-G acceleration and carries 10 tons of fuel to support the powerplant. A Model/1 computer is mounted next to the bridge. Two staterooms are shared by the crew of four during in-system operations, however staterooms are provided aboard the tug for all lighter crews during jump, to allow for social interaction. The staterooms in the lighters do remain accessible during jump, allowing lighter crews to have some private space if they wish it. The lighter has a 936-ton cargo bay. There are no ship's vehicles.

The type LH costs MCr178.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Type LH specifications: tonnage MCr
Hull (1000 tons, 1000 110
streamlined)
M-Drive E 9 20
Powerplant-E 16 40
Fuel 10
Bridge 20 5
Mod/1 computer 1 2
2 staterooms 8 1
Cargo Bay 936
Totals 1000 178</pre>[/QUOTE]Economics of the LASH concept.

The LASH tug is assumed to charge a fee of Cr500 per ton of vessel carried through one jump and is assumed to jump 35 times a year (three times a month for eleven months, with the last month taken up with two unpaid jumps getting to the shipyard and then having the annual maintenance performed). Refined fuel costs twice as much, since it is assumed to be delivered.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">LASH tug expenses (yearly): Credits
Fuel (35 jumps x 500 tons fuel/jump 18,100,000
+50 tons pp fuel x 12 months
x Cr1000/ton refined fuel)
Life support (26 s/r x 12 months) 1,248,000
Annual maintenance 641,000
Salaries (Cr44,000x12 months) 528,000
Bank payment (MCr2.671 x 12 months) 32,050,000
Total annual cost for the LASH tug: 52,567,000</pre>[/QUOTE]</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">LASH income (yearly): Credits
Carriage fees: (Cr500/ton x 4x1000 ton 66,000,000
lighters/jump x 33 paying jumps/year)

Gross profit: Cr 13,433,000 per year.</pre>[/QUOTE]</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">LASH lighter expenses (yearly): Credits
Fuel (10 tons/month x 12 months) 60000
Life support (2 s/r X 12 months) 96000
Annual maintenance 178000
Salaries (Cr17,000/month x 12) 204000
Bank payment 8,900,000
Carriage fees: (Cr500/ton lighter 16,500,000
x 33 jumps/year)
Total annual expenses for lighter: 25,938,000</pre>[/QUOTE]</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Lighter income (yearly): Credits
Cargo fees: (936 tons x Cr1000/ton 30,888,000
x 33 jumps/year)

Gross profit: Cr 4,950,000 per year.</pre>[/QUOTE]In short, under this system the LASH tug earns MCr 0.5 for every lighter she carries for one jump. The LASH tug can only afford to miss 26 such carriage fees in a year's operation before she starts to lose money, so there must be plenty of lighters and they must make rendevous smartly so the tug can quickly get back into jump.

The lighters also need to make three jumps a month, implying the existence of enough LASH tugs to allow this. Each jump a lighter fails to make costs Cr 436,000 in profit (Cr936,000 in unearned cargo fees, minus the Cr 500,000 in carriage fee not spent). Lighters can afford to miss 12 jumps before they start losing money. If 33 jumps a year can be guaranteed, LASH lighters can even afford to undercut the standard Cr1000/ton freight charge and still make money.
 
Originally posted by The Oz:
The tug's onboard fuel tankage of 550 tons supports all these drive/load combinations without any external fuel sources.

...

The lighters also need to make three jumps a month, implying the existence of enough LASH tugs to allow this.
OK, without checking your maths, there are two problems here.

First, when/how does the tug refuel? Wouldn't it be better if the lighter brings a fuel load to it?

Second, three jumps a month seems unreasonable for the lighters. They are the ones that will be spending all the time in normal space, after all.

They have to travel to a world, undergo customs checks, offload and load cargo, refuel, and travel back out to the pickup point in between every jump they make.

I would suggest that two jumps a month would be more likely.

That would cut down the profitability a bit, too.


Alan B
 
The way I see the LASH system operating requires 3 full loads of lighters and a couple of refueling vessels.

Using my 1000tTender/1500t lighter as an example consider two worlds, A and B.
Lighter1 with a full cargo hold docks with the Tender at the jumppoint and they jump to B. Beginning of day 1.
Day 6-8 emerge at world B where lighter2 is already full of cargo and waiting to go.
Lighter1 flys to B while lighter2 flys to the Tender which spends 1-2 days checking its systems, taking on fuel/supplies and then jumps back to A. I propose a conservative 1 jump every 10 days, that's still 33% more jumps per year.
Lighter1 now has 14-20 days to sort out port side arrangements (although if you operate another Tender then it could be ready to go again in 7-10 days)
Day 16-18 Tender arrives at A
Meanwhile lighter3 has been loading cargo at A and is waiting to go.
Lighter2 flys to A while lighter3 flys to the Tender, etc.
Day20 Tender and lighter3 jump to B.
You now have a trade loop between the two worlds.

Next step is to calculate the costs versus revenues (and to consider a liner varient lighter).
 
Sigg

your flight plans seem conservative (which is imo good) and well thought out. but how much does it cost for that lighter to move a ton of cargo from A to B? the lowest rate for which i could get a LASH tender to transport a lighter was over 580 per ton (i used a design with somewhat smaller displacement) which i thought was good, but it killed the lighter's profit margin in my designs :(
 
Originally posted by alanb:

I would suggest that two jumps a month would be more likely.

That would cut down the profitability a bit, too.


Alan B
really, the whole idea behind LASH (from my point of view) is to minimize the turnaround time to increase the profit margin. so what we want most here is more than 2 jumps per month.
 
Originally posted by Pwyll:
really, the whole idea behind LASH (from my point of view) is to minimize the turnaround time to increase the profit margin. so what we want most here is more than 2 jumps per month.
Well, I don't think you can for the _lighters_. You can make more than 2 per month for the tenders/tugs, easily.

What you are trying to do is haul the same amount of cargo with fewer ships. As a result, you have to consider the economics of the whole system, rather than of its individual components.

Alan B
 
Back
Top