CT Only: Low Passage and You!

[BytePro]

Not true.

Wrong - you failed your reading roll on that one.

The logical ramifications of jump shadowing for main sequence K and M stars are completely ignored by the trading rules.

Yep, they didn't exist when the trade rules were written. There are plenty of ignored 'logical ramifications' in both those rules. Of course, the topic of Trade rules didn't exist in the post you quoted, either.

Black globes? Well...you COULD find one I suppose, but for all the good it would do, sell it and buy practically anything.

He he, at least a decent ship with prices from 400 - 1,000 Cr. Though, it might come in useful defending against buyers who want a, er, steeper discount. :devil:

 

[rancke]

Not true.

Wrong - you failed your reading roll on that one.

No I didn't.

The logical ramifications of jump shadowing for main sequence K and M stars are completely ignored by the trading rules.

Yep, they didn't exist when the trade rules were written. There are plenty of ignored 'logical ramifications' in both those rules. Of course, the topic of Trade rules didn't exist in the post you quoted, either.

You said that normal turnaround with trade is two weeks. I believe this qualifies as "the topic of trade". And the normal trunaround being two weeks appears to be the case only because the trade rules fails to take jump shadowing into account. It is not actually the case though, and the fact that the trade rules do fail to take jump shadowing into account does not make your statement true. The reason why the trade rules fail to take jump shadowing into account is irrelevant; it doesn't change the truth value of your statement nor mine.


Hans

 

[atpollard]

When I have played "accountants in space" (Yes, I am one of those people who actually enjoys that type of campaign), Jump takes between 6.3 and 7.7 days (usually calculated as 7 days for simplicity) plus typically 8 to 24 hours to travel from the jump limit to the planet (or planet to jump limit). So the travel time from surface to surface is typically 8 or 9 days. This leaves 5 or 6 days in port to arrange cargo/passengers, engage in speculation and have some small adventure or misadventure.

On only two occasions have I encountered a world with a travel time of closer to 48 hours each way to/from the jump point. That made the trip about 11 days with only three days in port to keep the 14 day schedule. I chose to live with a 21 day schedule for those two worlds, but if I found myself trading frequently on such worlds, a 2G MD would probably fix the travel time (Fast Trader).

So do you have the Travel Times or Distances handy for these K and M stars that you see as such a problem?

 

[BytePro]

You said that normal turnaround with trade is two weeks. I believe this qualifies as "the topic of trade". And the normal trunaround being two weeks appears to be the case only because the trade rules fails to take jump shadowing into account.

Wrong again - on two counts. I did not post that trade does not qualify as 'the topic of trade', but rather, quite explicitly, it is not the 'topic of Trade rules'. And, the typical turnaround time of 'two weeks' is in the rules. To wit:

LBB2 - 'Commercial starships usually make two jumps per month.'
LBB5 - 'Most commercial vessels spend a week between jumps...'

In addition, LBB2 also states 'Non-commercial ships usually follow the same schedule of one week in jump and one week in a system.'

Jump shadowing and masking are exceptions to the rules - both literally and in practice.

 

[rancke]

On only two occasions have I encountered a world with a travel time of closer to 48 hours each way to/from the jump point. That made the trip about 11 days with only three days in port to keep the 14 day schedule. I chose to live with a 21 day schedule for those two worlds, but if I found myself trading frequently on such worlds, a 2G MD would probably fix the travel time (Fast Trader).

It would also increase the base cost of the ship and thus the loan payments. Would such a ship be able to compete with a cheaper ship with M1? Probably (I can't be bothered to work out the figures), if it stuck exclusively to trading with worlds deep inside jump shadows. Definitely not on routes to worlds outside jump limits.

So do you have the Travel Times or Distances handy for these K and M stars that you see as such a problem?

I don't see main sequence K and M stars as "such a problem". I see them as a source of significant discrepancies from the standard rules.

No, I don't have a full table. I have worked out figures for a couple of examples. I worked out Walston's position for an adventure I wrote for JTAS Online (It furnished a plot point).

Walston orbits 0.21 AU inside its sun's jump shadow. This means it takes 32 hours (26 hours extra) from arriving in the system to setting down on Walston, as opposed to the six hours it would take from the jump limit of a size 5 world. (Assuming a 1G maneuver drive).

I do see the bigger stars as really big problems. Heya's star is supposedly a K6 II and Lablon's an M2 II. I can't locate the figures right now, but in both cases we're talking additional weeks of insystem travel (Something that the canonical writeup of popular tourist goal Heya utterly fails to mention). That's weeks as in "only one trip this month to make enough money to meet the loan payment instead of two".


Hans

 

[rancke]

Wrong again - on two counts. I did not post that trade does not qualify as 'the topic of trade', but rather, quite explicitly, it is not the 'topic of Trade rules'. And, the typical turnaround time of 'two weeks' is in the rules. To wit:

LBB2 - 'Commercial starships usually make two jumps per month.'
LBB5 - 'Most commercial vessels spend a week between jumps...'

In addition, LBB2 also states 'Non-commercial ships usually follow the same schedule of one week in jump and one week in a system.'

I don't follow your logic. Even leaving aside that the simplified rules in LBB2 and 5 do not correspond to sound commercial practice (which would have regular commercial ships strive to reduce turnaround times to the minimum -- about a day instead of five), I don't see the relevance.

Jump shadowing and masking are exceptions to the rules - both literally and in practice.

No, they are not exceptions to the rules. That's the problem. They should be, but they're not. Jump shadowing alone (we're ignoring jump masking in this 'CT only' discussion) would affect travel times in the case of around one third of the canonical stars (Number quoted from memory; could be a bit off, but there are a lot of Class K and M stars). That's one humdinger of an exception.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

Isn't there a travel time in CT between jump points. So even with a Jump Six ship you are looking at a 3 week trip in space. One week to travel to a suitable distance from a gravatational body, if using a 1g thrust, followed by one week in jump, followed by a 1 week burn to the station in system. ...

A 1G ship can cover a billion kilometers in a week. That's well past Jupiter and a good ways toward Saturn's orbit in this system. That's what you'd need to clear the 100-diameter limit of a star ten million kilometers in diameter. That's a giant or larger star, somewhat rare - fewer than 10% in the Marches. Good ol' Sol, by comparison, is a bit under 1.4 million kilometers in diameter, 100-diameter limit's inside Earth orbit, and more than half the stars we encounter will be smaller than that.

I vaguely recall there were a couple of notable Marches worlds troubled by such large stars, but for most places you're either not going to be troubled by the shadow or you should be able to get out of the local star's naughty zone within a few hours to a couple or three days.

 

[aramis]

A 1G ship can cover a billion kilometers in a week. That's well past Jupiter and a good ways toward Saturn's orbit in this system. That's what you'd need to clear the 100-diameter limit of a star ten million kilometers in diameter. That's a giant or larger star, somewhat rare - fewer than 10% in the Marches. Good ol' Sol, by comparison, is a bit under 1.4 million kilometers in diameter, 100-diameter limit's inside Earth orbit, and more than half the stars we encounter will be smaller than that.

I vaguely recall there were a couple of notable Marches worlds troubled by such large stars, but for most places you're either not going to be troubled by the shadow or you should be able to get out of the local star's naughty zone within a few hours to a couple or three days.

Well over a dozen.

Cryton once compiled a list

 

[BytePro]

No, they are not exceptions to the rules. That's the problem. They should be, but they're not. Jump shadowing alone (we're ignoring jump masking in this 'CT only' discussion) would affect travel times in the case of around one third of the canonical stars (Number quoted from memory; could be a bit off, but there are a lot of Class K and M stars). That's one humdinger of an exception.

You keep contradicting yourself. 'Humdinger' or not, they are exceptions.

The rules and I both stated the norm. I understand your biases - there are plenty of inconsistencies and silliness inherent in the rules as written. Addressing those, instead of the veracity of my posts will result in fewer corrections.

Jump masking/shadowing rules were not part of the original CT rulebooks and there are conflicting official publications at odds with the them. Top it off with the OTU mapping being, by and large, the product of (flawed) programming rather than intentional design. However, the majority of systems are simply not documented enough at the system level to provide such conflicts as imperative. In most cases there are quite a number of variables subject to intelligent choices. Even within the rules there are several opportunities to adjust main world placement, trade routes, etc. to keep jump times within the 2 per month norm. Within 2 months, most can even out to 4 jumps without even trying to get fancy with system details. <shrug>

 

[rancke]

You keep contradicting yourself. 'Humdinger' or not, they are exceptions.

Read the paragraph again.

The rules and I both stated the norm.

Except that it is blindingly obvious from the setting description (i.e. stellar jump shadowing) that the rules do not describe one third of all cases. The rules ought to provide an alternate resolution method for that one third of all cases. Instead they just ignore one third of all cases. You may think that a procedure that does not apply to one third of all cases qualify for the term 'the norm', but I don't.

However, the majority of systems are simply not documented enough at the system level to provide such conflicts as imperative. In most cases there are quite a number of variables subject to intelligent choices.

I do not consider worlds with breathable atmospheres outside the life zones of stars to be a common occurrence. So all, or almost all (I won't rule out the odd bizarre exception), UWPs with breathable atmospheres indicate worlds in the life zone.

Even within the rules there are several opportunities to adjust main world placement, trade routes, etc. to keep jump times within the 2 per month norm. Within 2 months, most can even out to 4 jumps without even trying to get fancy with system details. <shrug>

Not so. For a free trader all 14 days of a jump is accounted for in the standard description of jumps. Any additional time travelling to and from worlds inside stellar jump limits are in addition to that and will never be averaged out by shorter time spans -- unless you ignore another part of the rules (i.e. the five days a free trader has to spend looking for freight and passengers), of course. Even them you're going to need a succession of abnormally short stays to even out just one visit to Heya.


Hans

 

[atpollard]

So would I be unreasonable to posit that for a world with 66 days from the surface to safe jump distance at 1 Gee (like the worst of those on Cryton's list), it might not be unreasonable to locate the Highport at the jump limit with interstellar passengers and merchants shuttled from the world to the highport on 6 gee shuttles? I mean most traders do not have 8+ weeks of endurance, so you would need a multiple fuel depots between the world and the jump limit anyway, so just moving the highport seems simpler.

And if this makes sense for a world 66 days into the jump shadow of a star, it might be 'normal' for most of those 1/3 of all systems where the stellar shadow is a potential problem.

 

[Supplement Four]

* A table showing the average extra travel time added to get to a world in the life zone of each star.

* A comment about which worlds need not be in the life zone. Possibly a die roll to establish if these mainworlds are shadowed or not (after all, just because they need not be deep in the star's jump shadow doesn't mean they aren't). Instruct referee to make a note for future reference.

* If destination has lots of trade, use the stated number of hours. If destination is unlikely to provide a decent cargo out again, double the stated number of hours (to account for both the arrival and the departure). Divide by 24 and round off. Add 10% to the standard freight and passenger prices for each extra day.
​

That should not add too much extra work for the referee.

Oh, almost forgot:

* A paragraph about what simplifying assumptions that has been made and what complications have been ignored.
​

Hans

I think I'll add that to that thread, too. Thanks.

 

[Vladika]

So would I be unreasonable to posit that for a world with 66 days from the surface to safe jump distance at 1 Gee (like the worst of those on Cryton's list), it might not be unreasonable to locate the Highport at the jump limit with interstellar passengers and merchants shuttled from the world to the highport on 6 gee shuttles?

Not unreasonable at all. It seems that you have hit on he solution that would most likely be followed in practice.

I mean most traders do not have 8+ weeks of endurance, so you would need a multiple fuel depots between the world and the jump limit anyway, so just moving the highport seems simpler.

Very logical and I doubt that any Free Trader (or other merchant) would want to do it any other way. Highport fees are probably going to be higher than normal though. Shuttle service too, though that's no concern of the trading ships.

And if this makes sense for a world 66 days into the jump shadow of a star, it might be 'normal' for most of those 1/3 of all systems where the stellar shadow is a potential problem.

I agree.

 

[BytePro]

...For a free trader all 14 days of a jump is accounted for in the standard description of jumps. Any additional time travelling to and from worlds inside stellar jump limits are in addition to that and will never be averaged out by shorter time spans --

Re-read the rules above. The term 'usually' in English means 'under normal circumstances' and 'less than always, but more than occasionally.'

Likewise, 'the norm' does not exclude significant exceptions - it simply refers to the most common case. 2/3rds certainly qualifies as the most common case.

Besides, the 1/3 you are using in the context of this discussion is not supported by the mechanics provided in LBB6 nor the link Aramis provided, which only lists 29 systems in the Marches with more than 2 days travel at 1 G for jumping. I haven't verified the numbers, but from a quick look at Travellermap.com, that amount looks reasonable. Travellermap lists 439 systems in the Marches, that's far from 1/3rd (more like 1/15th). Further, each UWP would have to be looked at to see if the HZ assumption was valid...

I do not consider worlds with breathable atmospheres outside the life zones of stars to be a common occurrence. So all, or almost all (I won't rule out the odd bizarre exception), UWPs with breathable atmospheres indicate worlds in the life zone.

I agree. However, there are worlds that do not have breathable atmospheres. Further, logically the 'bizarre exceptions' are one possible 'solution' for systems where transit for safe jump would otherwise be excessively, 'bizarrely', time consuming given a system on a trade route.

So would I be unreasonable to posit that for a world with 66 days from the surface to safe jump distance at 1 Gee (like the worst of those on Cryton's list), it might not be unreasonable to locate the Highport at the jump limit with interstellar passengers and merchants shuttled from the world to the highport on 6 gee shuttles?

'Technically' I think the 'Highport' is meant to orbit the main world - its Class would indicate ship repair and construction capabilities and fueling options. However, ships would not have to go to the starport to drop off and take on goods. That could occur at a space station, etc.

Of course, 'rules' are made to be broken - Marc started breaking them right off the bat with the Annic Nova. I've had standoff stations I referred to as 'jumpports' to expedite trade - even though I don't use the non-Book (JTAS) jump rules. <shrug>

 

[Supplement Four]

Of course, 'rules' are made to be broken - Marc started breaking them right off the bat with the Annic Nova. .

Out of curiosity...what rule did he break with Annic Nova?

 

[BlackBat242]

He had the jump drive powered by solar collectors, not "10% of ship's mass in fuel per jump number". There was no jump fuel storage anywhere in the ship.

At this time (CT) there were no rules anywhere which allowed this, the only rules required the fuel.

There was no power plant (again violating ship-construction rules), all power again being provided by the solar collectors.

This was in 1979, the ship design was published in JTAS #1, and again in Double Adventure #1 (Shadows/Annic Nova) published in 1980.

 

[atpollard]

'Technically' I think the 'Highport' is meant to orbit the main world - its Class would indicate ship repair and construction capabilities and fueling options. However, ships would not have to go to the starport to drop off and take on goods. That could occur at a space station, etc.

That's semantics.
One thing is for sure, if I need to spend a week in jump, then top off pp fuel and life support for a 4 week trip to the midpoint of my in-system flight, then stop and buy more fuel and life support for another 4 week trip to the highport where I need to top off fuel and life support again ... then that better be one heck of a highport!

Actually, for such a system, I [IMTU] would locate the commercial 'Highport' above a fuel source like an ice moon or gas giant outside the stellar jump shadow. The shipyards belong at mainworld orbit and are one of the most secure locations in the imperium ... weeks to intercept an enemy fleet!

Of course, 'rules' are made to be broken - Marc started breaking them right off the bat with the Annic Nova. I've had standoff stations I referred to as 'jumpports' to expedite trade - even though I don't use the non-Book (JTAS) jump rules. <shrug>

I actually love the Annic Nova. I never liked the shape of the ship, but if the Annic Nova is allowed, then I am free to interpret what can be done with the most imaginative brush possible ... so if I want a 'half-A' drive to allow a 100 ton J1-M1-P1 starship, then go for it [after all, just look at the Annic Nova] ... and if I want to create a combination MD-PP that is exactly 1 dTon (the minimum allowed by the rules) to allow for some really small 'small craft', then why not [after all, just look at the Annic Nova] .

YMMV (but the existence of the Annic Nova as canon, says I am right)

 

[BytePro]

That's semantics.

Exactly... the starport/spaceport stuff in CT leaves a bit to be desired (and, IIRC, Highport wasn't defined in CT). Spaceport codes, for instance, not providing refined fuel nor construction and overhaul of in-system ships (spaceships).

Actually, for such a system, I [IMTU] would locate the commercial 'Highport' above a fuel source like an ice moon or gas giant outside the stellar jump shadow. The shipyards belong at mainworld orbit ...

Yep, I called them 'jumpports'. However, shipyards could go anywhere and could exist outside of a starport - the nature of any at a Starport defines the class. If I were playing OTU, I'd think the Imperial shipyards generally belong at the starport and Naval bases due to extraterritorial issues.

...if the Annic Nova is allowed, then I am free to interpret what can be done with the most imaginative brush possible ...
YMMV (but the existence of the Annic Nova as canon, says I am right)

100% agreed.

 

[Reban]

Yep, I called them 'jumpports'. However, shipyards could go anywhere and could exist outside of a starport - the nature of any at a Starport defines the class. If I were playing OTU, I'd think the Imperial shipyards generally belong at the starport and Naval bases due to extraterritorial issues.

IMTU I call them "Outports" or "Forwards". I have quite a few mega-merchants and cargo liners that just can't afford to run all the way from the jump limit to orbit so they drop out of jumpspace 100Ds from the Outport unload cargopods or cargo lighters (for LASH operations), load the ones for this system and then jump on to their next port of call. The cargo lighters or pods are then sent in-system to the Mainworld, usually with M-Drive tugs.

Running it this way the MegaCorps can maintain high volume traffic between important worlds while there is still a place for smaller traders bringing cargoes to both less important worlds and delivering priority cargoes into orbit at Mainworlds that are jump shadowed.

Annic Nova works for me because this is science fiction, and you have to have somethings that are just so alien compared to the norm that the players and characters are left scratching their heads going "what the, who the, how the frak?".

 

[rancke]

So would I be unreasonable to posit that for a world with 66 days from the surface to safe jump distance at 1 Gee (like the worst of those on Cryton's list), it might not be unreasonable to locate the Highport at the jump limit with interstellar passengers and merchants shuttled from the world to the highport on 6 gee shuttles?

It would be most reasonable to suppose that, always provided the amount of traffic to the system is high enough to support such a structure.

(Side issue: I'm not sure one way or the other what acceleration the system shuttles would use.)

I mean most traders do not have 8+ weeks of endurance, so you would need a multiple fuel depots between the world and the jump limit anyway, so just moving the highport seems simpler.

It's not so much simpler as cheaper. Jump drives are a significant chunk of the cost of a starship, and every day the ship spends out of jump those drives are idle and nonproductive. If a starship did plan to visit a world deep inside a jump limit, it would be a simple matter to give it fuel tanks big enough to perform its intended purpose. That we haven't seen any such ship written up in Traveller canon could just be a matter of selection bias.

And if this makes sense for a world 66 days into the jump shadow of a star, it might be 'normal' for most of those 1/3 of all systems where the stellar shadow is a potential problem.

It makes sense if there is enough traffic to support such jumpports.

But there is another aspect, a purely game-oriented problem: Any writeup of a world with such a jumpport will be less useful, because there will be few or no casual visits to them. A free trader jumping to, say, Heya would spend six days at the jumpport and leave again without coming within sniffing distance of Heya itself. This particular example is of personal interest to me, as I've almost finished two different adventures set on Heya and come up with a lot of addtional setting material that I'm actually rather fond of. But it's only going to be useful to referees that can send their PC groups to Heya on specific missions. With the standard trader campaign where PCs are scrambling to make ends meet they can't afford to park their ship on Heya Farport and go for a tourist jaunt to a world weeks away by system shuttle. So all my lovely background detail is going to languish unused and unheeded. <sniff> It's really very heartrending. :nonono:


Hans