Random speculations on the 4dT/2dT living space.

[rancke]

Or a reflection that Vargr and non-Solomani Humaniti have the same need for personal space. It's easier to cross understand the Alien Realms reference as a different division of the 4Td per each due to different psychology. Say, 2 to 3Td of cabin, and 5 to 6 of non-cabin space for the 2 Stateroom pair, and the cabin is shared.

Leaving aside the utter incredulty that the claim that normal humans can't endure ten days in space cooped up in a lot less space than a 2 dT cabin plus some common room space evokes in me, we know for a fact that humans can survive double occupancy for months, since the rules allow is for military and private vessels. I can't think of any other way to prevent commercial vessels from selling double occupancy passage than regulation and enforcement. Given that, some Vargr states might have regulations, but it wouldn't be the same regulations from one state to the next, and a lot of Vargr ships wouldn't operate under any regulations at all.

In fact, that it's constant for Imperials, Aslan, Vargr, Darrians, Vilani, Vegans, Zhodani, Newts, Ael Yael, and even Hivers and Dolphins, but different for Solomani, Droyne, Virushi, Dandies and K'Kree, shows that it's at least partially about needs, not wants.

No, it doesn't. All it shows is that when writing about Imperials, Aslans, Darrians, Vilani, Vegans, Zhodani, Newts, and Ael Yael, the writers either didn't give the issue any thought or deemed it of too little importance to devote word count to.

It's reasonable enough many non-humans would need different amounts of life support and living space. Indeed, the number of non-humans that just happen to require the same amount as humans is rather implausible and most probably another manifestation of the writers not exploring all the ramifications[*].

[*] Please note that this doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the writers; simplification is an essential feature of rules writing.​

Solomani are, unlike generic imperials, from a cluster of several overpopulated hive worlds long settled (by the time covered in AM Solomani, 3500 years of space travel, most of it desperately seeking an edge, driven by manifest destiny, and racism - a superiority complex driving tolerance for smaller volumes).

No. Just no. There's no fundamental biological difference between Solomani and any other sub-species of Homo sapiens. If psycological factors can enable Solimani to endure cramped quarters, other psycological factors (like the desire to save money) would enable Imperial, Vilani, Zhodani, Darrians, etc., etc. to endure it too.

And when an adventure conflicts with a rulebook, I side with the rulebook every time.

I know you do. That doesn't prevent me from believing that you're wrong (though not necessarily every time. ) Most of the time you are, though. Except for very, very simple situations, any game rule that describes any feature of a universe as complicated as our own (and the Traveller universe is just that; different from our own in a few ways, but conceptually every bit as complicated) is necessarily a simplification that ignores huge swaths of "reality".

The notion that the rules defines the game universe belongs to board games; it has no place in role-playing games.


Hans

 

[McPerth]

I still don't see that as a problem. I see that as a good thing. If you have more chance of getting mid passage passengers then why not do something like that? If you use your own design or one that is modified some from standard ones, you could add more ammenities for only the high passage passengers so they think they are getting more for their money.

Well, perhaps the word problem was not the most adequate one for what I meant (but, please, allow this humble non-english speaker some latitude in his wording ).

What I mean is that rules must be somewhat adapted, and the economic standards which with the game runs are slightly altered. Even so, as I told above, I did it IMTU.

So, on an actual passenger ship of some size there might be a gym, spa, Z-G play area, etc., for only high passage passengers while the middies get to use their area for dining when meals aren't being served and can watch holovids or something....

The key here are your own words ship of some size. That may well work for medium to large lineers, but for the player's tramp freighter (that the free/far/fat trader represents, as I see them), all passengers (except low ones, of course) go together, and if they have the rooms ready for double occupancy (and so for mid travellers) they renounce to the possibility of high ones.

 

[rancke]

The key here are your own words ship of some size. That may well work for medium to large lineers, but for the player's tramp freighter (that the free/far/fat trader represents, as I see them), all passengers (except low ones, of course) go together, and if they have the rooms ready for double occupancy (and so for mid travellers) they renounce to the possibility of high ones.

Another key is that given the choice, the kind of people who are willing to pay for high passage is already not going to travel by tramp freighter. So anyone willing to travel by tramp freighter is already out of options, and the presence or absence of high passage cuisine[*] and service isn't going to change his mind one way or the other.

[*] Assuming for purposes of argument that there is any difference between mid passage cuisine and high passage cuisine. Given that they cost the ship exactly the same, that's a very iffy assumption.​

Hans

 

[samuelvss]

Assuming for purposes of argument that there is any difference between mid passage cuisine and high passage cuisine. Given that they cost the ship exactly the same, that's a very iffy assumption.
Hans

IMTU, that is a key difference between mid and high. Middle passengers get their meals in sealed trays, generally issued at the beginning of the flight, which they wait to stick in a warmer in a self-service kiosk portion of the galley. Stewards take a combination of some similarly preserved (and even prepared) ingredients, put them on proper plates, along with a smattering of fresh ingredients, and serve them with a little panache. Somewhat similarly, the fresher in each cabin includes a small washing/drying unit. In the High Passage cabins, laundry is done by Stewards; in Middle Passage, you do it yourself. Middle passengers get a room to themselves, or not; it is really sort of luck of the draw. Imperial regulations require full disclosure by a half an hour before departure of the identity of any roommate, and allow a full refund of any passenger deciding to withdraw from the passage. This is a source of not a little bribery of stewards, though usually less than Cr2,000, of course, where High Passage is to be had.

 

[Greylond]

I've always thought of it as the same difference between 1st Class and Coach on an airliner. Slightly better facilities, served the "good" food/beverages and better guaranteed service.

 

[HG_B]

Assuming for purposes of argument that there is any difference between mid passage cuisine and high passage cuisine. Given that they cost the ship exactly the same, that's a very iffy assumption.


Hans

Yes. IMTU High Passage only exists on dedicated, large passenger liners. All else is Mid passage. High passage means extra's like Grav Ball courts, min. 4 dton (floor space) staterooms, 24h room service, etc.

 

[rancke]

IMTU, that is a key difference between mid and high. Middle passengers get their meals in sealed trays, generally issued at the beginning of the flight, which they wait to stick in a warmer in a self-service kiosk portion of the galley. Stewards take a combination of some similarly preserved (and even prepared) ingredients, put them on proper plates, along with a smattering of fresh ingredients, and serve them with a little panache. Somewhat similarly, the fresher in each cabin includes a small washing/drying unit. In the High Passage cabins, laundry is done by Stewards; in Middle Passage, you do it yourself.

IMTU that sort of differences are available (at a price) on large regular liners, and are most often designated Mid and High. But what is referred to as Mid and High Passages in daily talk are actually called respectively Standard and Priority Passage Vouchers. A Standard Passage Voucher can be used as payment for a standard passage of any length in a single stateroom. A Priority Passage Voucher can be used as payment for a passage at the highest available standard plus up to 1 dT of baggage. And it entitles the holder to pre-empt a stateroom if the ship is full up.

On fledgeling lines and even more so on tramps, there simply is only one class and you get the same food and the same service regardless of whether you use a Standard or a Priority Passage voucher. You still get people using Priority Passage vouchers, but only in order to secure a stateroom, and there's a story behind every such passenger.


Hans

 

[Limburger59]

Enjoying the conversation as a lurker.

I will say that all my shipboard experience was in SE Asia, and there are few ships in that "sector" like the Freedom of the Seas.

One trip had my wife, two kids, and myself in one cabin; one trip had just a curtain between my bunk and the hallway (similar to Japanese capsule hotels), and a few trips were "low passage" where I had a cot on the deck and used my luggage as a pillow.

 

[BytePro]

IMTU (LBB1-3), standard fares are regulated, collected and payments dispersed by the starport. Passengers obtained through the 'boards' (ala the Passenger table) use their passage tickets or buy passages via the spaceport authorities, not individual ship pursers, etc.

Private owners who want to take advantage of this service must agree to the standard terms... which set the price per destination based on quality per the 10,000/8,000/1,000, and the 1 steward per 8 high passengers requirement. The terms of this allow for double occupancy on privately-owned starships (LBB2-pg14), but require single stateroom for regular lines (which, unstated, would 'unofficially' tend to get preferential treatment, if just in name recognition, placement on the boards and departure scheduling).

A caveat of (LBB2-pg9) 'Passage is always sold on the basis of transport to the announced destination, rather than on the basis of jump distance.' is that one is free to offer any destination, regardless of the number of jumps, but only gets paid for 1 passage ticket (and will likely suffer against 'faster' offers, including at passage counters where potential passengers are likely to be sure to be 'informed'). So while normally a J-1 would only offer J-1 destinations per passage, they could offer a J-3 for the cost of one passage. This regulation prevents a J-1 ship from being paid in advance for 3 passages for one passenger at the departing port for a J-3 destination. The passenger must buy three passages (locally or at intermediate destinations), but the ship owners would only get paid at each departure. (If they don't manage to jump out of the departing system, customers can get their money back ...).

The upshot of all this is that the industry is regulated when passenger and ship choose to use the system. Independents can always offer different services - but they and their passengers are on their own when it comes to cost, quality, collecting, and, quite importantly, logging destinations (for customs, and for 'safety'). Independents are free to pursue passengers - without benefit of their ship and destinations appearing on the normal boards (and are not permitted to advertise except via personal solicitation, which would tend to make most passenger's leary). They are still required to report their destination and identify passengers to starport authorities (subject to penalties, etc...) - and are more likely to be boarded/inspected in higher quality ports (Admin/Bribery skill time!).

I generally stick to the 4 dtons per upto 2 persons for life support (LBB2-pg14) and typical 2 dtons average for actual room (HG-pg33) - but, for non-commercial ships sometimes use the (more expensive) small craft 2 tons total offering half-day double occupancy. (Private ships doing this would typically be hassled by starport authorities in systems with commercial competition or an axe to grind... :devil.

 

[Carlobrand]

Leaving aside the utter incredulty that the claim that normal humans can't endure ten days in space cooped up in a lot less space than a 2 dT cabin plus some common room space evokes in me, we know for a fact that humans can survive double occupancy for months, since the rules allow is for military and private vessels. I can't think of any other way to prevent commercial vessels from selling double occupancy passage than regulation and enforcement. Given that, some Vargr states might have regulations, but it wouldn't be the same regulations from one state to the next, and a lot of Vargr ships wouldn't operate under any regulations at all.

I would add the condition that the ship should be constructed for it, if it's expecting to do that commercially. Tossing in bunks doesn't mean the ship has adequate kitchen or dining facilities for the added load. Being able to do it in a pinch isn't the same as being able to compete in a market that way.

That being said, it would be interesting to see a future Branson start up a Virgin Imperial Lines around no-frills double-occupancy service.

...No. Just no. There's no fundamental biological difference between Solomani and any other sub-species of Homo sapiens. If psycological factors can enable Solimani to endure cramped quarters, other psycological factors (like the desire to save money) would enable Imperial, Vilani, Zhodani, Darrians, etc., etc. to endure it too.

Might be some sociological differences at work.

...The notion that the rules defines the game universe belongs to board games; it has no place in role-playing games....

While I will agree that the rules should sometimes give way for the story, the plain fact is that consistent rules provide a framework in which the player can plan and solve the problems he encounters. Rules do define the game universe - they must, or the player will never know if it's his wits or the gamemaster's whim that pulled him through that tight spot: success will lose some of its savor, and failure will take on a nasty personal tone.

It's just that one should be careful not to be slavish about applying rules since, as you point out, they're a simplification - and they can sometimes get in the way of maintaining pace and drama.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi,

I guess in addition to the kitchen and dining spaces, there's also fresh water/water reclamation capacity as well as air scrubbing limits to consider too.

 

[Timerover51]

Hi,

I guess in addition to the kitchen and dining spaces, there's also fresh water/water reclamation capacity as well as air scrubbing limits to consider too.

Air scrubbing limits are not a problem, but oxygen consumption might be. The way to get around that is have an excess supply of water on board, and electrolyze that into oxygen and hydrogen, then react the hydrogen with the carbon dioxide from the scrubbers to get methane and oxygen.

As for water, the Voyager of the Seas, slightly smaller than the Freedom of the Seas, uses 1,000 tons of fresh water per week's voyage (this is based on conversations I had with the ship's officers). She is rated at a bit over 4,000 total passengers and crew, and does no water reclamation on board. Multiplying 4,000 total souls on board by 7, you have 28,000 person-days for water usage, or 28 person days per ton of fresh water. One thousand liters of water, i.e. one ton, is equal to a fraction over 264 gallons, or just under 9.5 gallons of water per person per day, water usage, with no reclamation. That equals a total mass of water per person of 554 pounds per week, with no reclamation. If you assume a water reclamation efficiency of only 50%, then one ton, or one cubic meter of water would be adequate for 8 persons for one week. I suspect that with current, as in Real World, technology, the water reclamation efficiency is considerably higher than 50%. Allowing for at least one week's reserve, one cubic meter of water will supply enough for 4 persons. One Traveller displacement ton of water will supply 54 person for 2 weeks easily at 50% reclamation efficiency.

For food, as these would be reasonably sedentary individuals, i.e. not probably engaged in extremely strenuous labor, 5 pounds per person per day should be more than adequate. One long ton, 2240 pounds, of US Army Class A rations, which is a wide variety of foods, including fresh and frozen meat, vegetables, and fruit, occupies 94 cubic feet of shipping space. That will feed 32 persons for 2 weeks on the basis of 5 pounds per person per day. One Traveller displacement ton will contain 5 long tons of food, sufficient to feed 160 persons for 2 weeks.

With respect to kitchen and dining spaces, I will need to do some measuring of the galley and dining space on board a US Coast Guard 180 foot buoy tender that I have good general arrangement drawings off, and post those later. The tender's mess facilities were adequate to feed a crew of 50+ persons on a 24 hour a day basis. That did include a separate mess area for the CPOs and the officer's wardroom. Going by a rough eyeball, the galley is about 4 meters by 4 meters, the crew and CPO mess area is about 4 meters by 12 meters, and the wardroom is an irregularly shaped area of say 5 meters by 5 meters. This class of tenders were designed before World War 2, but built during the war, so you could adjust the space area a bit for Traveller usage.

I would say that the food and water usage given here would hold true in Traveller, and that the messing arrangements could be used for your average Free Trader or combat ship. The tender has a displacement tonnage of 935 tons, and again, based on a rough eyeball, I would guess an internal volume of all enclosed spaces of about 2400 tons, so roughly the same internal volume as a 200 ton Free Trader.

I hope that this is of help to you.

 

[aramis]

In addition to simple supplies of O2 and water is distribution thereof.

It doesn't matter if the ship can handle 50 people, if it can only circulate that capacity to 20 rooms.

Decentralization is good in such cases - the subs I've toured all had multiple air scrubbing systems - specifically so that, should a compartment flood, you don't have to worry about the air circ system being compromised. Likewise, a disgruntled squidly can't kill the entire ship with a single act of sabotage.

Water is actually easier to move around - it can easily* be manually moved in sufficient quantities. Same for sewage.


* well, provided you have suitable containers, at least. A human needs 1-5L per day to survive, and cleaning can use up to 100L pretty quick - even efficient showers are typically 6L per minute, and high flow ones can be 10 or even 20L per minute. But a person can bathe adequately with only 3L of water... 1L for wash, 2L for rinse. In a pinch, a person can maintain basic health in a clean environment with only 1L. So, depending upon a lot of factors, you can probably get by with 5-7L per passenger per day, counting sufficient for washing hands with a mister and soap (about 0.5L each), 0.25L for rinsing after oral cleaning, 3L for beverage, and 1L for a birdbath - share with a buddy - 0.5L for soapy water, 1.5L in two 0.75L bowls for rinse. If you have a mister, you can get by with about 0.2L for rinse - but you'll need towels.

 

[Darkwing]

In the navy today, enlisted live in racks. A 6'X6'X6' cube holds 6 racks with coffin lockers. Fill an open berthing with however many cubes you need (typically at least 6-8 cubes, often 15-20), plus the 2' wide walkways, usually a small tv lounge, and the shared head. Smaller berthings might have 2-3 each sinks/toilets/showers, larger ones may have as many as 10.
On amphibs, troop space have 4-high racks with no coffin locker, so that same 6'X6'X6' cube holds 8 marines. Additionally, instead of a lounge, they have a table by the racks, and the walkway is actually the ship's passageway.
The table also has 3-5 canvas and aluminum tube cots kept above the table for excess bedding.
In addition, you need to consider the fan rooms that move air as part of the accommodations and as part of life support. Traveller deck plans always make life support in one or two places, but it should be distributed for effectiveness and to minimize damage.
Water is made onboard by reverse osmosis and evaporators, and we sometimes use too much and have to go on water hours. On starships, of course, air and water would be reclaimed from waste, whereas today, we store waste in CHT (collection & Holding tanks) when inside 3 nautical miles of land, and vent straight to the ocean outside that limit.
The Traveller minimums make sense for paying passengers on cruise ships. But the military standards are way too nice; that's a lot of wasted space for a warship - or a tramp freighter!
I blame it on the writers thinking in terms of civilian apartments and college dorm rooms, rather than barracks and berthings.

 

[aramis]

In the navy today, enlisted live in racks. A 6'X6'X6' cube holds 6 racks with coffin lockers. Fill an open berthing with however many cubes you need (typically at least 6-8 cubes, often 15-20), plus the 2' wide walkways, usually a small tv lounge, and the shared head. Smaller berthings might have 2-3 each sinks/toilets/showers, larger ones may have as many as 10.
On amphibs, troop space have 4-high racks with no coffin locker, so that same 6'X6'X6' cube holds 8 marines. Additionally, instead of a lounge, they have a table by the racks, and the walkway is actually the ship's passageway.
The table also has 3-5 canvas and aluminum tube cots kept above the table for excess bedding.
In addition, you need to consider the fan rooms that move air as part of the accommodations and as part of life support. Traveller deck plans always make life support in one or two places, but it should be distributed for effectiveness and to minimize damage.
Water is made onboard by reverse osmosis and evaporators, and we sometimes use too much and have to go on water hours. On starships, of course, air and water would be reclaimed from waste, whereas today, we store waste in CHT (collection & Holding tanks) when inside 3 nautical miles of land, and vent straight to the ocean outside that limit.
The Traveller minimums make sense for paying passengers on cruise ships. But the military standards are way too nice; that's a lot of wasted space for a warship - or a tramp freighter!
I blame it on the writers thinking in terms of civilian apartments and college dorm rooms, rather than barracks and berthings.

Have you looked at the actual specification sheets from the USCG's or USN's naval architects? Lots of things there there that add up real fast, but in Traveller are subsumed in "quarters" space. It's much more obvious when you do 3D walkthroughs.

 

[Darkwing]

Have you looked at the actual specification sheets from the USCG's or USN's naval architects? Lots of things there there that add up real fast, but in Traveller are subsumed in "quarters" space. It's much more obvious when you do 3D walkthroughs.

Nope, just speaking from experience. I saw Navy Times articles and occasional Naval Engineering Journal articles on berthings, but really never saw the improvements supposedly slated for new ships.

 

[Greylond]

Darkwing, I've always felt the same way. Navy berthing was like what you describe 25 years ago also. At one point I got to see more ships than your average sailor when I was on a repair team in San Diego. Got to see the insides of several destroyers and frigates, some that were 20 years old at that time and pretty much every ship I saw was the same as you describe. Senior Enlisted(Chief PO's) berthing was more like what is described in Traveller.

But I don't let it bother me that much...

 

[Omnivore]

Then again I was in the Air Force so what do I know :rofl:

 

[Greylond]

Then again I was in the Air Force so what do I know :rofl:

Don't even get me started on the AF "Dorms" that I saw at a couple of places. Those of us sailors usually referred to them as "Hiltons"...

 

[Darkwing]

I didn't want to turn this into an interservice rivalry! My point, based on real-world usage today (not even getting into age of sail living conditions), was that the volume of space for living need not be nearly so large. Civilians who've never seen it wouldn't think of it, and would keep looking at apartments and dorms.

WWII subs are even more cramped - all the racks are together, and you'd crawl over someone else to get to yours - in addition to the fact that they didn't have enough for each sailor to have his own, so they hot-racked.