And the feared Sardaukar...
Small Ship fleet sizes
- Thread starter whartung
- Start date
And the feared Sardaukar...
"On Imperial worlds, roughly 30% of the total military budget goes to the Imperium for maintenance of the Imperial military." [Striker 2, p. 38].
Also, the fact that Imperial nobles quite often don't rule "their" worlds (and when they do, rule them through a separate 'planetary ruler' hat) makes it a bit difficult to spend revenue from them as if they did.
It's mentioned in Regency Sourcebook that nobles sometimes insert themselves in the chain of command, but there's no hint that they have any automatic place in it.
GT:Nobles places the Imperial high nobles in a parallel chain of control from that of the Imperial services. They have civilian oversight of the things going on in their demesnes, but day-to-day Imperial business is performed by the bureaucracy and the services.
FFW gives Norris a place in the naval chain of command, but that authority is not confined to the forces in Regina, and his naval superiors are his superiors in and out of the Regina subsector.
Hans
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
It's a very feudal approach, too. The vassals are expected to bring with them a certain amount of military might when their liege calls. (No idea on how it might relate to canon, though.)
This goes fully against my own vision about the Imperium (already told about in other threads), where IN squadrons are rotated quite often to avoid it to become 'native' and shift their loyality from the Imperium to the zone where they serve (Domain, Sector or Subsector).
Althrough, that approach would work for an ATU (but any small ship universe it's IMHO), but sure an interesting one.
Althrough, that approach would work for an ATU (but any small ship universe it's IMHO), but sure an interesting one.
Duly noted. I'd forgotten those bits.
You're right, although the events of MegaTraveller (if you accept that particular version of events, which I do not, will not, can not, no way, no how, never ever ever ever :devil
suggest they're not rotating them. As Rancke points out, there are canon elements that hint pretty strongly against enfeoffment as a basis for the naval budget, but it would make for one great ATU, especially a small ship ATU. I like the idea a lot.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
If the pop is 300 B then I must have mistyped the 3000 B. Sorry. Fat fingers and a tendency to hold buttons down when tired.
I am kinda liking the feudal chain of support idea also. May have to kick it around and find the actual flaws in it myself.
We can always take a look at it from the Roman Republic idea where Great Men raised legions at their own expense and then the state paid the maintenance as another alternative.
Great linkage there, as a Roman scholar, why didn't I think of that!? Yes, historically, in feudal societies I think you might find many examples of armies raised by nobles, bit states.
It still might mean punishing taxes on the liege vassals, but so be it. Or, the may be vast revenues from coal mines, gold mines or desert spices...
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
A fellow Roman Scholar! Nice. My second bachelor's degree is Ancient History (Rome).
Got the Math PhD because everyone is always looking for Math people. Got the History degree because of my reading tendencies. They don't offer a History degree in the Far Future. :smirk:
Hi,
I guess to me, I still don't see 5000 dton ships as really being that small, while 100,000+ dton ships seem really humongous to me. As such, I'm still hing up on why merchant ships in any setting would really have to be all that large, regardless of world populations.
As I noted previously the Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) in Chicago is just over 100,000dtons or so in size, while the real world ocean going ships below are on the order of about 5,000 dtons (if I have done my math correctly)
While the largest ship ever built in our world (if I am remembering correctly) appears to work out to just a little under 60,000 dtons.
In the end, to me even if we are talking about a setting were some planets are fairly heavily populated, I wouldn't be surprised if having one or more modest sized ships departing each day between some of the more heavily populated worlds wouldn't make more sense than just having one or two humongous ships making the journey only once a week or so (kind of similar to how you may have shuttle flights from New York to DC (perhaps even 1 per hour during part of the day) each day rather than just one big flight per day).
Regards
PF
I guess to me, I still don't see 5000 dton ships as really being that small, while 100,000+ dton ships seem really humongous to me. As such, I'm still hing up on why merchant ships in any setting would really have to be all that large, regardless of world populations.
As I noted previously the Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) in Chicago is just over 100,000dtons or so in size, while the real world ocean going ships below are on the order of about 5,000 dtons (if I have done my math correctly)
While the largest ship ever built in our world (if I am remembering correctly) appears to work out to just a little under 60,000 dtons.
In the end, to me even if we are talking about a setting were some planets are fairly heavily populated, I wouldn't be surprised if having one or more modest sized ships departing each day between some of the more heavily populated worlds wouldn't make more sense than just having one or two humongous ships making the journey only once a week or so (kind of similar to how you may have shuttle flights from New York to DC (perhaps even 1 per hour during part of the day) each day rather than just one big flight per day).
Regards
PF
'Small' and 'big' are just shorthand for 'small compared to HG's humongous ships' and 'much much bigger than Book 2's limit of 5000T'.
Hans
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
So, you're not on Trantor, then?
As far as contributory forces, I have a few polities in my sector (with more sectors to come - some day) that work that way. A couple actually require the systems to buy, staff and provision the units (fleet or ground forces). Others buy and provision as a polity, but the crews/manning come from the systems. The second way works muuuuuch better in terms of operational command and control conflicts.
High Pop worlds in Traveller as likely to be barren, airless rocks as a garden world, so you can't assume local factors won't inhibit population grown.
Also, and this is more for what I'm personally aiming for, but 600 years is rather old for a colony world in a frontier.
Actually, IMO the complete lack of correlation between habitability and population in Traveller is a big fat flaw in the world generation system and the sooner it is fixed the better.
Hans
No kidding
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
You have to account for the old folks dying, though, atpollard. (Unless you assume they *are* Adam and Eve!
) In <500 years, starting from a population of 1,000, it is possible to reach Pop 6 (maybe 7), with a generous population growth factor of 5%*. Hitting Pop 9 from 2 is a little bit tougher.* For comparison, current pop growth factor in the US is around 2%, iirc. And, that includes immigration, and a replacement level of fecundity.
You have to account for the old folks dying, though, atpollard. (Unless you assume they *are* Adam and Eve!
GURPS Space (2nd and 3rd edition, not sure about 1st or 4th) devotes about a half a page to determining the population of a colony after X hundreds of years, given the starting population and several planetary factors (gravity, temperature, etc.). Base increase is x10 per century, but is normally much lower.
Two thoughts on population growth:
1. Concerning dying: Under the assumptions that I outlined earlier, half of the population was born within the last 20 years ... so factoring in dying will only require adding one more generation (20 years) to the time estimates. These assumptions and calculations are gross oversimplifications, but my intent was to get a quick-and-dirty idea on how long it might take to reach a population of 1 billion (decades, a century, a millennium?)
2. In the real world, things like droughts, disease, wars, and competition for resources all exert a downward pressure on population growth. Nothing that I have read in Traveller suggests that these are significant factors in a CT LBB Third Imperium [MegaTraveller Hard Times and later TNE resources paint a harsher reality]. So my assumptions were intended to reflect a 'Frontier' (population growth is good) mentality and a Traveller advanced TL ("we have the local issues of weather, disease, war and resources covered") reality.
Change the assumptions and you change the results.
[Changing the assumptions cuts both ways: Starting with a 120 year life expectancy, 60 years of child-bearing, no infant mortality and a baby every 3 years yields 20 children per couple. A colony of 1000 Uber-Adam and Uber-Eves will only require about 140 years to grow from Pop 3 to Pop 9. Of the 6 living generations, 4 of those generations can remember hearing stories of the early years and why they settled here told by the original colonists.]
1. Concerning dying: Under the assumptions that I outlined earlier, half of the population was born within the last 20 years ... so factoring in dying will only require adding one more generation (20 years) to the time estimates. These assumptions and calculations are gross oversimplifications, but my intent was to get a quick-and-dirty idea on how long it might take to reach a population of 1 billion (decades, a century, a millennium?)
2. In the real world, things like droughts, disease, wars, and competition for resources all exert a downward pressure on population growth. Nothing that I have read in Traveller suggests that these are significant factors in a CT LBB Third Imperium [MegaTraveller Hard Times and later TNE resources paint a harsher reality]. So my assumptions were intended to reflect a 'Frontier' (population growth is good) mentality and a Traveller advanced TL ("we have the local issues of weather, disease, war and resources covered") reality.
Change the assumptions and you change the results.
[Changing the assumptions cuts both ways: Starting with a 120 year life expectancy, 60 years of child-bearing, no infant mortality and a baby every 3 years yields 20 children per couple. A colony of 1000 Uber-Adam and Uber-Eves will only require about 140 years to grow from Pop 3 to Pop 9. Of the 6 living generations, 4 of those generations can remember hearing stories of the early years and why they settled here told by the original colonists.]
Last edited:
You have to account for the old folks dying, though, atpollard. (Unless you assume they *are* Adam and Eve!
* For comparison, current pop growth factor in the US is around 2%, iirc. And, that includes immigration, and a replacement level of fecundity.
Either I am misunderstanding "population growth factor of 5%" or you have an arithmetic error.
5% growth = population x 1.05 per year
Over 500 years = 1.05^500 = pop x 39 billion
So 1000 people x 39 billion = 3.9 x 10^13 people = Pop 13
From another website, a 5% annual population growth = 72/5 = 14.4 year population doubling time.
Year 0 = 1000 people = Pop 3
Year 14 = 2000 people = Pop 3
Year 28 = 4000 people = Pop 3
Year 43 = 8000 people = Pop 3
Year 57 = 16 thousand = Pop 4
Year 72 = 32 thousand = Pop 4
Year 86 = 64 thousand = Pop 4
Year 100 = 128 thousand = Pop 5
Year 115 = 256 thousand = Pop 5
Year 129 = 512 thousand = Pop 5
Year 144 = 1 million = Pop 6
Year 158 = 2 million = Pop 6
Year 172 = 4 million = Pop 6
Year 187 = 8 million = Pop 6
Year 201 = 16 million = Pop 7
Year 216 = 32 million = Pop 7
Year 230 = 64 million = Pop 7
Year 244 = 128 million = Pop 8
Year 259 = 256 million = Pop 8
Year 273 = 512 million = Pop 8
Year 288= 1 billion = Pop 9
I suspect that for an interstellar TL civilization, planetary population levels are more of a cultural than biological choice.
On the issue of taxes and revenue:
The lowest crewman on a Starship earns 1000 credits per month (12,000 credits per year). Since 1 credit was roughly one US Dollar back in the 1970's when the first edition was being written, 12,000 credits translates to about $48,000 in current money. Close enough to the US average to use as a first approximation for Traveller Average Annual Wages (general population).
Starting with 12,000 credits per year per worker (roughly half of the US population are workers) gives 6000 credits per year per population as a first-approximation average.
If the tax rate is only 10% (less than half or a third of most modern tax rates), then the government would collect about 600 credits per person in taxes. Setting defense at an arbitrary 10% of the total budget, yields 60 credits per person as the total defense budget. Dividing the 60 defense credits by an arbitrary 3 way equal split, gives 20 credits per person for each Ground/Water Forces, COACC (air/orbit forces) and Navy (space).
I have no idea how a Navy budget breaks down for bases, ships and whatever else, so I leave the details for those more knowledgeable than myself, but the figures of 1 to 10 credits per person bandied about seem not only reasonable, but perhaps a little on the low side.
The lowest crewman on a Starship earns 1000 credits per month (12,000 credits per year). Since 1 credit was roughly one US Dollar back in the 1970's when the first edition was being written, 12,000 credits translates to about $48,000 in current money. Close enough to the US average to use as a first approximation for Traveller Average Annual Wages (general population).
Starting with 12,000 credits per year per worker (roughly half of the US population are workers) gives 6000 credits per year per population as a first-approximation average.
If the tax rate is only 10% (less than half or a third of most modern tax rates), then the government would collect about 600 credits per person in taxes. Setting defense at an arbitrary 10% of the total budget, yields 60 credits per person as the total defense budget. Dividing the 60 defense credits by an arbitrary 3 way equal split, gives 20 credits per person for each Ground/Water Forces, COACC (air/orbit forces) and Navy (space).
I have no idea how a Navy budget breaks down for bases, ships and whatever else, so I leave the details for those more knowledgeable than myself, but the figures of 1 to 10 credits per person bandied about seem not only reasonable, but perhaps a little on the low side.
According to Striker, the average military spending is 3% of GWP. The highest possible per capita income is Cr42,240 for a Rich, Agricultural TL15 world, but since high-population worlds can't be rich or agricultural, such worlds don't weigh heavily in the overall picture. Industrial TL15 worlds, OTOH, have a per capita income of Cr30,800 and all industrial worlds have high populations.
The average TL of Imperial planets is 12, so perhaps Cr16,000, the per capita income of a TL12 worlds with no trade modifications, would be a reasonable figure (Personally I suspect that those high-pop industrial worlds will pull the average up, but let's assume not). 3% of that is Cr480. Still according to Striker "roughly 30% of the total military budget goes to the Imperium for maintenance of the Imperial military".
So that's Cr144 per Imperial subject, of which there are said to be 15 trillion, which gives us an Imperial military budget of 2,160 trillion credits.
Hans
The average TL of Imperial planets is 12, so perhaps Cr16,000, the per capita income of a TL12 worlds with no trade modifications, would be a reasonable figure (Personally I suspect that those high-pop industrial worlds will pull the average up, but let's assume not). 3% of that is Cr480. Still according to Striker "roughly 30% of the total military budget goes to the Imperium for maintenance of the Imperial military".
So that's Cr144 per Imperial subject, of which there are said to be 15 trillion, which gives us an Imperial military budget of 2,160 trillion credits.
Hans
Similar threads
