• 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.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Pondering starship evolution

Fair enough. I only went into the weeds on this to correct the historical record and highlight the limits of the engineering metaphor.

What happened with the arguably TL transitions was very much a factor of multiple conditions and it could, likely would have played out very differently without the war and specifics of the US industrial plant and transport needs.

I would take that to mean things can play out in your universe any darn way you like, just work out the background to a consistent level whether you do SFlow’s full business case driven ship designs or some lesser involved but unlikely to be punctured by player disbelief.
I totally understand. When it comes to railroads I can get seriously into the weeds (or the ruff for you golfers). I try to keep it under firm control to stay away from straying off topic.

And you're right about the TL transition. This is a good example of new tech vs old tech and the inertia that adoption sometimes has to overcome.

I also absolutely agree about consistent background for (any) universe. There are a number of ideas that I have tossed over the years before they even are suggested for play because I was/am not satisfied with the consistency.
 
I would take that to mean things can play out in your universe any darn way you like, just work out the background to a consistent level whether you do SFlow’s full business case driven ship designs or some lesser involved but unlikely to be punctured by player disbelief.
In my case, the reason why I "go so far" as to examine the "full business case driven ship designs" can be summed up in a single word.

r6Bw2k8.gif

But jokes aside 😅 ...the other reason is to delve into the "end user experience" of what it means to LIVE WITH the design choices of the Naval Architect's Office Work for years/decades of operations, so as to learn what impacts different choices make on The Bottom Line™ for bean counters who care about profit margins (because their lives and livelihoods depend on them, so ... go figure, eh? :rolleyes:).

It's something of a "traveling salesman problem" to figure out what kind of starship class design you "need" in order to be able to operate as a tramp merchant along the frontier with enough self(ish) sufficiency AND security to be able to keep operating for years/decades and have a decent expectation that you'll "come out ahead" after all that work (with hopefully enough profit to re-invest and start the cycle all over again).

And yes, in order to investigate that question and the impacts of design decisions made before construction, you kind of HAVE TO do the sort of deep dive into The Simulation™ that I've been exploring over the long haul of this thread, with the occasional foray into making deck plans once I've got the Naval Architect Office Spreadsheet of features and functionality nailed down.

At some point here, I'm going to switch over to the (newer) 300 pixels per deck square resolution size Geomorphs set and start making new sets of deck plans for a 100 ton Scout/Courier (Type-S2), a 280 ton Rule of Man Long Trader and a 410 ton Rule of Man Clipper ... because it's FUN to think about these things and see where they go. 😁

The bonus experience then becomes realizing that just because a class design was built by a specific polity (Second Imperium/Rule of Man, pre-Long Night) doesn't mean that the engineering, design and business operation principles are necessarily "confined" to that polity (or era) only. Convergent Evolution IS A THING, even in the realm of interstellar transport and merchant operations, so the insights that I manage to tease out of the CT ruleset can be broadly applicable to more than just a single point in time or specific region of space.



For example ...



The Vilani designed J1/1G Free Trader is something that "makes sense" if your homeworld is part of a J1 Main.
The Vilani Main includes 985 star systems. 😲

Chart_Vilani_Main_Basic.png


It therefore makes perfect sense for the Vilani to have somewhat subtantially stagnated on J1 as being "adequate" to most interstellar transport "needs" when building out an empire from their home star system.

Likewise, Zdant is a part of the Zdant Main and thus J1 would be "adequate" for most interstellar transport "needs" in the Zhodani polity when building out the Consulate for an extended period of time.



By contrast, the Solomani homeworld is NOT on a Main ...

jumpmap

... and thus J1=1 parsec range interstellar transport options would be ... sub-optimal ... to the needs of any Rule of Man Empire that needed to interface with the homeworld of the Solomani. That kind of "environmental pressure" resulting from the jump map arrangement of nearby stars would therefore logically produce a "need" for J2=2 parsec range interstellar transport options that would become an enduring "feature" of the cultural attitudes of businesses within the polity of the Second Imperium/Rule of Man/Ramshackle Empire. I can also likely surmise that such "demands for mercantile range options" are what (eventually) prompted the development of the Vilani J2 Far Trader class design after the Interstellar Wars era.

But that still begs the question ... what kind of (early expansion) starship classes would the Solomani have been building as their "tramp merchant" starship classes in time to meet the needs of the Second Imperium? Because no matter what anyone says, your basic J1/1G Free Trader is simply NOT GOING TO CUT IT as an all around solution for "small time, breakbulk" merchant transport to all locations.

Furthermore, there are going to be places on the map where you need 2+ parsecs of range in order to "marry up" differing interstellar markets. Caravanserie can help bridge between J1 Mains, but their services can potentially be "expensive" (in a variety of ways and meanings), so ... Use At Own Risk. Sometimes you're going to want to have an unrefueled range of 3-4 or even 5-6(!) parsecs, in order to bypass/jump over potential trouble spots/profit loss sinks on the way to your ultimate destination. Being able to multi-jump through empty hexes on the interstellar map can be a highly advantageous shortcut *IF* your starship is capable of performing such maneuvers (reliably).

All of these considerations would have far more "merit" to them in the context of a Solomani cultural background than would be the case with a Vilani (or Zhodani) cultural background ... because Main: YES vs Main: NO.



And then you get to places like the Great Rift, Lesser Rift, Delphi Rift and Windhorn Rift where the demand for jump RANGE becomes an overriding priority (of the "you must be this high to ride this ride" variety). Any kind of extended range (via multi-jump) starship design can (start to) solve the "problem" of being able to transit across the Rifts while still carrying a "useful load" of revenue tonnage capacity for doing merchant transport work with. What does it take in order to jump so far into the void and make it back out again? Is it even (theoretically) possible to do so ... and still turn a profit, so the business enterprise can survive long enough to keep making the journey(s)?

Vilani attitude: That's Somebody Else's Problem.
Solomani attitude: HOLD MY BEER.

Those kinds of differences in cultural background then become the springboard for fun little ideas of how to tackle these kinds of challenges ... and what might result from success in those efforts ... to Boldly Go Where No One COULD Go Before ... :cool:
 
By contrast, the Solomani homeworld is NOT on a Main ...
I went and looked it up in GT:ISW to find out how the Terrans broke out early one with just J1, and with ISW, early on, you couldn't jump to "empty space".

They mention that they surveyed for a rogue planet out in the dark that was with J1, then built it up as a remote fueling base before breaking out to Bernards Star. I imagine they kept that up until they connect to the J1 main and spread like rats.
 
I went and looked it up in GT:ISW to find out how the Terrans broke out early one with just J1, and with ISW, early on, you couldn't jump to "empty space".

They mention that they surveyed for a rogue planet out in the dark that was with J1, then built it up as a remote fueling base before breaking out to Bernards Star. I imagine they kept that up until they connect to the J1 main and spread like rats.
Exactly.
A Calibration Point within 1 parsec was necessary in order to "escape" from the Solomani home star system and reach their first J1 main segment ... at which point the Land Grab™ was ON and the Solomani spread between the stars.

Eventually, the Solomani "cracked" the secret of being able to jump into empty space/hexes and then jump again, but that was a later development, later on down the timeline.
 
The Vilani designed J1/1G Free Trader is something that "makes sense" if your homeworld is part of a J1 Main.
The Vilani Main includes 985 star systems. 😲

Chart_Vilani_Main_Basic.png


It therefore makes perfect sense for the Vilani to have somewhat subtantially stagnated on J1 as being "adequate" to most interstellar transport "needs" when building out an empire from their home star system.

Likewise, Zdant is a part of the Zdant Main and thus J1 would be "adequate" for most interstellar transport "needs" in the Zhodani polity when building out the Consulate for an extended period of time.

Looking at other species, the K'kree start on a decent main, and have a couple of other large mains in their empire, so they get a decent start before their inefficient starship design practices will start to bite.

Aslan space tends towards being bunches of clusters and short mains, but they got to start with a decent type of jump drive and this astrography probably suits their preferred political and trade structure. Hiver space is much the same, which would've slowed them right down with their early (terrible) jump drives.

Vargr space is similar, but contacts some really nice mains, one going deep into Zho territory, another other deep into Vilani (now Imperial) space. Fun for everyone.

Solomani space is just awful, with tiny clusters, and next to no decent mains until you get well into Vilani/Imperial space to coreward. Rimward, it's just scattered clusters. It's easy to see why the Solomani went coreward, especially once Vilani political and military resistance collapsed. It wasn't just more attractive politically and commercially, but also astrographically. So rimward settlement by the Solomani being something that was done by fringe groups who wanted to get lost and 'insurance' projects by paranoid Terrans in the early days makes a good deal of sense.
 
Solomani space is just awful, with tiny clusters, and next to no decent mains until you get well into Vilani/Imperial space to coreward. Rimward, it's just scattered clusters. It's easy to see why the Solomani went coreward, especially once Vilani political and military resistance collapsed. It wasn't just more attractive politically and commercially, but also astrographically. So rimward settlement by the Solomani being something that was done by fringe groups who wanted to get lost and 'insurance' projects by paranoid Terrans in the early days makes a good deal of sense.
It's not paranoia when SolSec/Vilani Shadow Imperium/Ancients (probably) are definitely out to get you!
 
Solomani space is just awful, with tiny clusters, and next to no decent mains until you get well into Vilani/Imperial space to coreward. Rimward, it's just scattered clusters.
I hadn't done a deep dive into the interstellar mapping of the other major race homeworlds like you've done here ... but it's Nice To Know™ that the Solomani are basically the only major race (aside from the Droyne!) who started at a "2+ parsecs away from anywhere useful" disadvantage with respect to the location of their homeworld and the astrogation needed in the region around that starting point once jump drive got discovered.
 
Which is how I think they really did it.

Canon has conflicting stories with just enough wiggle room.

Earth produced jump drives required a mass to aim at, consumed all their fuel in the jump, and yet took a long time to get there and back.

I think a more likely scenario is that the fifferent nations trying for the first interstellar mission had to do it the hard way, jump to the furthest kueper/oort object that had been detected along the path of travel to the destination star. Once there they would need a JWT like array to find the next suitable body to jump to, not to mention fuel and stores to be brought by support vessels. The would thus make the crossing in multiple small jumps from object to object until they are actually detecting suitable bodies in the "kuiper/oort" region of the target system.

The US, ESA, China, India, Russia all had their missions, the US was lucky in that they found their path first. It is also likely they were all attempting different routes to different nearby stars. Fortunately the US mission encountered Vilani traders rather than a fully occupied Ziru Sirka world...

the rest, as they say, is future history.
 
Default ten percent fuel consumption is minimum, so it's obvious why development kept to factor/one.

But, in the spirit of hitting the hundred diameter boundary, a quarter parsec jump can exit, look around, set up sensors, and jump back.
 
a 100 ton Scout/Courier (Type-S2), a 280 ton Rule of Man Long Trader and a 410 ton Rule of Man Clipper
Finally had time to do the necessary mathematical jiggery-pokery (the proper technical term, I'm led to believe) to redesign a 100 ton Scout/Courier into being something that uses the 30 ton Box inside an internal hangar bay as an intentional design feature which then becomes easy to "hot swap" for different mission profiles.

Here's what popped out the other end of that effort.



Rule of Man Scout/Courier (Type-SP, TL=9)
100 tons starship standard hull, atmospheric streamlining (configuration: 2) (MCr3) (LBB2.81, p15, p22)
0 tons for Armor: 0 (TL=9, Composite Laminates, bulkhead thickness=20cm)
15 tons for LBB2.81 standard A/A/A drives (codes: 2/2/2, TL=9, EP=2, Scout) (MCr22) (LBB2.81, p22)
32 tons of total fuel: 100 tons @ J2 = 20 tons jump fuel + 20 tons power plant fuel
20 tons for bridge (200 ton rating, MCr1)
2 tons for model/2 computer (MCr9)
  • Standard software package (MCr2 budget for programs) (LBB2.81, p41)
    • Maneuver (Space=1, MCr0.1)
    • Jump-1 (Space=1, MCr0.1)
    • Jump-2 (Space=2, MCr0.3)
    • Navigation (Space=1, MCr0.4)
    • Generate (Space=1, MCr0.8)
    • Library (Space=1, MCr0.3)
  • 0.1+0.1+0.3+0.4+0.8+0.3 = MCr2
1 ton for hardpoint+dual turret: no weapons (MCr0.6) (LBB2.81, p23)
30 tons for hangar capacity (MCr0.06)
  • 16Sta14Car Box = 30 tons
* External Docking: 100 tons capacity (MCr0.2)


0 tons for cargo hold

= 0+15+32+20+2+1+30+0 = 100 tons
= 3+22+1+9+0.6+0.06+0.2 = MCr35.86

= MCr35.86+(4.169) = MCr40.029 * 1.0 = MCr40.029 single production
= MCr35.86+(4.169) = MCr40.029 * 0.8 = MCr32.0232 volume production

Crew = 1 (Cr6000 per 4 weeks crew salaries)
  1. Pilot-1 = (6000*1.0) = Cr6000

  • J2, 2G, Agility=2: 100 + 0 = 100 combined tons
  • J1, 1G, Agility=1: 100 + 100 = 200 combined tons (3x 30 ton Boxes = 90 tons)



16Sta14Car Box (Type-RU, TL=9)
30 ton small craft hull, configuration: 4 (MCr1.8)
0 tons for Armor: 0 (TL=9, Composite Laminates, bulkhead thickness=20cm)
16 tons for 4x single occupancy starship staterooms (MCr2)
* External Docking: 6x 30 = 180 tons capacity (MCr0.36)
14 tons for cargo hold (vehicle berth or mail vault conversion ready)
• 9 tons for 9 ton capacity internal demountable fuel tank (MCr0.009)

= 0+16+14 = 30 tons
= 1.8+2+0.36+0.009 = MCr4.169 single production



Decided that I needed a "better standardized encoding method" to identify the various types of 30 ton Boxes, which could quickly/succinctly convey the major features inside. The solution was an extremely simplistic:
  • 2 digits (indicating tonnage allocation) + first 3 letters of the feature/fitting
  • repeat as necessary until all major design features/fittings specific to a particular Box are detailed
  • add 1 space followed by the word "Box"
So the 16Sta14Car Box (seen above) is a 16+14=30 ton Box with 16 tons of staterooms (so 4x staterooms) and a 14 ton cargo hold as the basic features of that particular outfitting.



As mentioned previously (the last time I brought up the notion of a redesign of the stock Type-S Scout/Courier of LBB2 fame), the end result is slightly more expensive than the Vilani version ... but that's because the Solomani (Rule of Man) redesign is made with a "tow hitch" capability to facilitate external loading compatible with the 30 ton Box containerized modular shipping transport standard that I've come up with for the 280 ton Rule of Man Long Trader and the 410 ton Rule of Man Clipper starships, respectively. Other benefits include sufficient fuel capacity for J2+2 (32+9=41 tons) and the inclusion of the Generate program in the Standard Software Package, thanks to the upgrade to the model/2 computer, which completely dispenses with the need to purchase Jump Tapes (Cr10,000 per parsec of radius from star system of origin) in order to be able to jump.

In terms of the "tonnage budget" compared to the stock Type-S Scout/Courier ... the modifications functionally amount to:
  1. The air/raft berth is removed, increasing cargo capacity from 3 tons to 7 tons.
  2. Cargo capacity is reduced from 7 tons to 6 tons in order to upgrade the computer from model/1bis to model/2.
  3. Cargo capacity is reduced from 6 tons to 5 tons in order to increase (combined) fuel tankage capacity from 40 tons to 41 tons, which then enables J2+2 before needing to refuel.
  4. 5 tons of cargo capacity is sufficient for a mail vault (for courier duty) OR an air/raft + 1 ton of life support consumables reserves for extended operational endurance missions and duty assignments (exploration, survey, etc.). Courier duty would require the installation of offensive weaponry in the (dual) turret and the assignment of a Gunner to the crew roster, along with the purchase of the Target computer program (if using LBB2 space combat rules).
Being able to dock with external loads of up to 3x Boxes and still be capable of J1+1/1G drive performance makes a tremendous number of modular transport mission tasking options possible, while retaining a 2 parsec range before needing to refuel. The internal hangar bay is used to enable orbit to surface shuttle transfers through atmosphere without needing to rely upon the services of other craft. This makes it possible to deliver relief supplies (cargo Box), living agricultural products (environment Box), stasis passengers (low berths Box) and even outpost modules for sustained habitation/exploration/survey missions to extremely remote and austere locations in support of an incredibly wide variety of tasking needs. It even means that "in a pinch" the class can be used as a makeshift fuel transfer shuttle/tanker, using 3x 30Car Boxes with 30 ton collapsible fuel tanks installed inside, should the need arise (in sufficiently permissive environments).
 
16Sta14Car Box (Type-RU, TL=9)
30 ton small craft hull, configuration: 4 (MCr1.8)
0 tons for Armor: 0 (TL=9, Composite Laminates, bulkhead thickness=20cm)
16 tons for 4x single occupancy starship staterooms (MCr2)
* External Docking: 6x 30 = 180 tons capacity (MCr0.36)
14 tons for cargo hold (vehicle berth or mail vault conversion ready)
  • 9 tons for 9 ton capacity internal demountable fuel tank (MCr0.009)

= 0+16+14 = 30 tons
= 1.8+2+0.36+0.009 = MCr4.169 single production

:unsure:

Is an internal demountable fuel tank (9 tons) really the best choice here? 🧐
  • A demountable tank consumes tonnage regardless of whether it is filled or empty of fuel, so the tonnage is "inflexible"
  • A demountable tank is "immediately available" as a fuel source (as if it were an internal fuel tank)
The thing is, the 9 tons of fuel in that tank will be "almost never" needed on an unplanned/immediate/emergency basis. It's there as a fuel reserve for jumps, but the internal fuel tankage of the 100 ton starship is 32 tons ... and thus fully capable of supporting the 20 ton fuel cost of a 2 parsec jump without requiring additional fuel reserves.



By switching to a 9 ton collapsible fuel tank instead of a 9 ton demountable fuel tank in the cargo hold, additional "usable" cargo space becomes contextually available (relative to the alternative) on a situational basis.
  • 14 tons = 9 tons internal demountable fuel tank + 5 tons of multi-purpose capacity
  • 14 tons =
    • 14 tons internal collapsible fuel tank + 0 tons of multi-purpose capacity
    • 9 tons internal collapsible fuel tank + 5 tons of multi-purpose capacity :rolleyes:
    • 0.14 tons of (empty) collapsible fuel tank + 13.86 tons of multi-purpose capacity 🤔
    • 0.1 tons of (empty) collapsible fuel tank + 13.9 tons of multi-purpose capacity 💡
Sure, fuel transfer time increases when using a collapsible fuel tank (3 hours, according to LBB A5, p13) rather than being fungible/instantly available with a demountable fuel tank ... so there IS a tradeoff. However, the typical/nominal circumstances under which that fuel reserve ought to be used/consumed will involve plentiful lead times/advance planning ANYWAY in which a 3 hour delay for a fuel tankage transfer becomes something of a non-issue.

For example ... when double jumping (J2+2 or J1+1) and spending 16 hours after breakout from jump on routine drive maintenance checks (LBB5.80, p17) ... that's plenty of time for a 3 hour fuel transfer to take place during the routine drive maintenance checks from the collapsible fuel tank (Box) to the internal fuel tanks (starship) prior to making the second of two jumps. It's not like the fuel transfer "needs to wait" until AFTER the 16 hour drive maintenance checks have been completed before the fuel transfer can begin. The 16 hour post-breakout routine drive maintenance checks can be happening concurrently while the 3 hour fuel transfer operation is going on, so in normal/routine operations there's "no (additional) delay" before jumping a second time.

It WOULD however mean that instead of being able to make a second jump "within the hour" after breakout that there would be a "minimum delay" (of at least 3 hours) before being able to initiate a second jump ... so rapid flashes (breakout, jump again) would not be possible with a collapsible fuel tank.

Which then brings up the notion that the internal demountable fuel tank is the "better option" for RAPID courier demands and mission tasking ... while the collapsible fuel tank alternative is the "more flexible choice" for more ROUTINE and ordinary deployment schedules where quickness to final destination is less of an issue/priority.



16Sta14Car Box (Type-RU, TL=9)
30 ton small craft hull, configuration: 4 (MCr1.8)
0 tons for Armor: 0 (TL=9, Composite Laminates, bulkhead thickness=20cm)
16 tons for 4x single occupancy starship staterooms (MCr2)
* External Docking: 6x 30 = 180 tons capacity (MCr0.36)
14 tons for cargo hold (vehicle berth or mail vault conversion ready)
  • 0.1 tons for 10 ton capacity collapsible fuel tank (MCr0.005)

= 0+16+14 = 30 tons
= 1.8+2+0.36+0.005 = MCr4.165 single production



It's not that one alternative is "better" than the other in all possible contexts and circumstances ... but rather that the two different options/implementations play to different operational strengths when needing to double jump. Which alternative is "better" for the mission(s) depends on what the mission(s) are intended to be (and why you would want to be operating That Way™). :sneaky:

Oh and as a bit of side note trivia for the collapsible fuel tank option ... 🤫
The 20 ton Launch and 30 ton Ship's Boat (LBB2.81, p18) have 13 tons and 13.7 tons of multi-purpose/reconfigurable cargo space in them, respectively ... so a 30 ton Box having (up to) 13.9 tons of unused cargo hold capacity is hardly "out of bounds" for small craft at these tonnages (except that the Launch and Ship's Boat both have drive systems ;)).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top