CT Only: Spinward Courier

[Spinward Flow]

But that's not the owner/operator concept, more UPS airplane driver adventure.

Not a life worth adventuring in.

If the goal is to maximize PROFITS at the expense of everything else, then being a delivery pilot with no downtime (other than during overhauls) is the way to go. If you overhaul the ship more frequently than once per year (because there's only 1 shipyard along your route that can do so and the timing of your route isn't "perfect" for doing overhauls there only once per year) then you can have as much as two spans of 2 weeks each per year on the world where your overhauls are done. That still leaves you with up to 3 months (12 weeks) away from running your assigned subsidized route each year where you'll have the starship available. Of course, the potential of those 3 months per year, in financial terms, become speculative if you aren't running mail deliveries during that time.

Time to consider the economics of play value in your ship design.

o:

I did and I have.
How about you?

 

[kilemall]

o:

Um ... I spent entire posts in the original write up (back on page 1 of this thread) detailing why "one and done" interstellar jumps to the mainworld only is the default assumption too many Referees and Players have for trade in the Traveller universe due to a lack of detail for star systems beyond just the mainworld. It's the kind of blinkered thinking that the Terra system has only one planet (Terra), the world has no moon, there are no other planets or moons in the system (just Terra), there are no populations on any other planets or moons in the system ... so obviously there is no need or reason to go anywhere else in the system besides just Terra only (because, why would you?).

And yet, if I open LBB6 to page 56 ... there is Sol, Mercury, Venus, Terra (Luna), Mars, the Planetoid Belt, Jupiter (Ring, Io, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto), Saturn (Ring, Janus, Mimas, Enceladus, Tethys, Dione, Rhea, Titan, Hyperion, Iapetus, Phoebe), Uranus (Ring, Miranda, Ariel, Umbriel, Titania, Oberon), Neptune (Triton, Nereid) and Pluto (Charon).

That's 5 terrestrial worlds (Mercury, Venus, Terra, Mars, Pluto), 1 Planetoid Belt, 4 Gas Giants and 23 Moons. Total number of separated populations in the system ... 15 separate worlds, moons and the planetoid belt.

So if you deliver to Terra, that means you've delivered simultaneously to everywhere from Mercury to Pluto throughout the system all in one go, might as well leave ... right? Because, I mean ... why would you ever go anywhere else besides Terra? And if you don't need to go anywhere else, you don't need a maneuver drive to get you anywhere else besides the mainworld ... right? Jump in, spend a week at Terra, jump out again ... because Terra is the only place that matters.

Well, in a speculative cargo delivery Merchant Prince sense, that is probably true, because the largest population codes beyond Terra (code: A) are found at Luna (code: 7), Mars (code: 5) and the Planetoid Belt (code: 6) ... but compared to Terra, that's nothing and not even worth bothering with, so ... why bother?
I

Remember ... if you deliberately set up a Traveller universe in which interplanetary travel is pointless, you're not going to get a whole lot of interplanetary travel happening ... because, why?

I'm a bit flabbergasted at this response. I'm not discounting having multi-world systems, I almost always flesh them out IMTU. But I am saying any subsidizer worth beans isn't going to sink extra capital into a ship that has extra overhead hauling around a jump drive on multi-day M-drive interplanetary trips, they are going to use much smaller local small craft at a lower rate for the hind end runs. You'll have direct interstellar drops to the biggest pop/value worlds, and small craft for the lowpop mining facility.

Pretty sure the LBB Rules As Written (RAW) specify that velocity from before jump is retained after jump.

LBBs themselves did not, JTAS articles did I believe.


And again, my view is the referee's universe matters, RAW is a guidepost.

It CAN be done ... but the safety for doing so essentially requires type A/B starports only in order to "eliminate" the opportunity for pirate encounters (per RAW in LBB2.81, p35). However at that point you're looking at an almost completely different business model where the basis of your profit margins shifts away from the guaranteed return of mail delivery (the advantage of mail) towards the more speculative return on passengers and cargo transport. The vessel then operates in a very different economic climate and you start skewing the incentives away from the backwater and "basket case" economies so as to get back to the more profitable "main routes" for lucrative trading ... in other words, you have a profit motive to abandon the very niche market the Spinward Courier was designed to fill and are instead back to more of a Free Trader type situation and circumstances.

Subsidized ships have a route. So they don't have a choice about skipping the small worlds on their route. But we already know a regular ol' speedy mail ship isn't going to be functional via a regular 40-year loan. So by default this ship type is ONLY going to have the subsidized mail contract and go where no rational trader would choose to.


My argument is that in order to make it worthwhile there needs to be a side hustle built into that ship, and people out there one day in port for 9 months in a row are going to be stir crazy and frankly not people I want handling my mail. A more regular run with the occasional big speculative score is a more interesting choice both business model AND play model.



As to the economics, a 4-G ship is going to cost millions less, it's a better value proposition AND has the opportunity to pick up a few tons and/or speculation buys here and there. Literally MORE economical before it even goes on it's first run and has potential for profit and/or adventure.

 

[kilemall]

True, but in order to disable a ship so as to capture it for salvage, first you have to damage it. Sandcasters and Missile Racks do not require drive power, nor does a model/2 computer ... so simply emptying the fuel tanks through damage results isn't going to disable the ship. A no fuel condition would result in an Agility: 0 condition, but the ship would still be capable of fighting. LBB5.80, p43 stipulates that in order to board a vessel it must have no maneuver capability and also not have any offensive weapons. So boarding a Spinward Courier requires surface damage results that ultimately yield zero fuel remaining (1-3 hits, depending on fuel state) AND 2 hits to the missile rack before the ship is disabled and can be boarded.

Not seeing a problem here other then destroying potential valuable drives and hardware. A lot would depend on the psychology of survival vs. no quarter.

But maneuver drive hits are all over that surface table, so stopping it won't be a problem for something like a corsair with several times the firepower. Jump drive alone can make it worthwhile, along with likely an undamaged power plant.

That's assuming of course you are doing LBB5 only- LBB2 has all the drives available to hit, key items destroyed in the critical hits, and the Select Fire program where you can hit specified systems, cherry picking the M-drive and turrets for optimal takedown without destroying the ship value.

Combat starts at long range (best case scenario for missiles), the Spinward Courier will presumably be attempting to break off by acceleration at the end of the first combat round (so if the attacker cannot match the Spinward Courier's agility by the pursuit step at the end of the first combat round, the Spinward Courier escapes from combat). Under a lot of circumstances (not always, granted), this will often times mean that an attacker only gets a single combat round to attack and attempt what amounts to a "lucky shot" in order to disable a Spinward Courier. So while it's possible to do, it isn't all that likely an outcome.

It's true that LBB5 has that breakoff rule, but it seems kind of silly to me to tie one's ACS role play to a resolution system designed for big fleet ship design combat derby.

In LBB2 movement a 6-G ship is going to outpace a 4-G one but it matters greatly what vee and course the pirate ship has. Even a range band method or Mayday would have a period of time the 6-G ship is vulnerable. So if you do LBB5 alone, well I can see the value proposition there- just not as clear an advantage under any other movement system.

The rest is reiteration on the point of going to unprofitable planets, which is handled by the subsidized hardcoded route anyway. Enforce the mechanism, that's where they go. Since the small craft handle the second string mail runs on a cheaper basis, it's not such a big payoff to saddle the courier with 6-G drives AND fuel AND power plant to run all that.

Several people up for the space UPS lifestyle would PREFER small craft single system duty, would get them going to their home likely at least once a week. Right tool for the right job.

It's the same life that delivery drivers on vending machine routes live right now, or FedUps drivers live on. The economics are based on the idea of making a lot of deliveries quickly so as to realize a rate of revenue return that keeps you in the black after accounting for expenses.

Oh no question there is a market for 6-G small craft on the interplanetary mail routes where speed is more valuable. Just not piling on J-2 AND 6-G in one ship when Cr25000 in-system makes no fiscal sense whatsoever.

Ah, I see that you're still ignoring everywhere in a star system beyond the mainworld. If you're going to just ignore all of the other population centers within a star system ... well ... you aren't going to need much of a maneuver drive then, are you?

Not at all but I'm looking to use the right tool for the right job. You don't have airmail planes or mail semis pull up to your house, they go in bulk to a central distribution point, then trickle down to local small craft then whatever pneumatic tube/delivery drone/gravtruck gets it to the delivery address.

Already detailed that when operating under a subsidy, a crew only needs to be making deliveries for 70% of each year (LBB S7, p22). 70% of 52 weeks per year is 36.4 weeks, so we'll just call it 36 weeks per year need to be spent making deliveries. 52-36=16 weeks remaining per year to get up to shenanigans and detours. However, 2 of those 16 weeks per year will need to be spent on annual overhauls when the ship is laid up at the starport and not available.

That's 3.5 months (14 weeks) per year the crew can have time for shenanigans and detours away from their subsidized mail delivery route (with the ship). Name another job that would give you 3.5 months off per year to go "do your own thing" on vacation where you could come back after being away that long and still have a job. You can even extend that time to 4 months (16 weeks) if you include the duration of the annual overhaul, provided you don't mind the fact that you won't have a starship at your disposal for 2 of those 16 weeks.

Ok, I never valued S7 so much as to catch that 70% rule, so that's interesting. That does allow for shenanigans- 30% of the time less maintenance. However, the seven or so extra runs you are talking about in that 70% time works out to something like Cr175000 more. A nice payday, sort of, in that you split it with the government entity then between two, definitely a nice payday for space truckers but not much in the risk big/win big ethos. But hardly worth running hard for 9 months out of the year when a little speculation can go a LOOONG way.

Another point is that chartering is going to be worth nothing by RAW given no staterooms and hardly any cargo space. 6-G SHOULD get you considerations, but they will have to be referee moderated.

I'd also rule that the ship was being run harder/more 'mileage' and so maintenance is going to cost more credits and possibly time.

[FONT=arial,helvetica]:file_19:

I did and I have.
How about you? [/FONT]

Yep. If you must play by LBB5 rules then the 6-G ship practically gets away from anything but fighters or longrange big ship autokill.

Otherwise, the J-2/6-G ship with 1-day turnaround makes for game 'farming' and few options on 'personal time' whereas the J-2/4-G opens up the speculation AND adventuring game with more room to carry equipment or cargo. Heck even a fighter.

And subsidized ships doing fast interplanetary runs at interstellar rates must have a noble patron arranging this for their own reasons, otherwise it makes no sense.

Heh, now that could justify your business model- nobles set themselves up to have fast couriers subsidized at government expense and on the patronage hook for doing little small packet/comms 'favors'. Don't play ball? Contract cancelled. Such a shame.


Final point- who is really going to WANT this thing after it's paid off except for the subsidized mail model? Smugglers perhaps, but otherwise it doesn't do anything for pleasure or business or adventuring. Just air/rafts, two people or 4 on short trips, not worth the candle. A 4-g ship with some cargo, maybe room to fit in some low berths or another stateroom, is going to have a better aftermarket and something players could use after it's paid off.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Final point- who is really going to WANT this thing after it's paid off except for the subsidized mail model?

It's a Courier starship.
It is purpose built to fill its niche role (Mail Vault transport) at a balance point between cost, reasonable reliability (unlikely to be intercepted), with a high operational tempo being the expectation and guaranteed profitability on every mail delivery (very nearly regardless of where the destination is).

It does what it's designed to do very very well ... a combination of interstellar AND interplanetary courier duty (specifically mail deliveries).

As I've already detailed, it is even possible for the ship to turn a profit for the subsidizing government over 40 years worth of deliveries, using only the 50% of gross revenue that accrues to the subsidizing government. So on a purely monetary basis, it's a fair expectation to at least break even over that 40 years of operation ... which of course ignores all the the indirect benefits (monetary and otherwise) that result from a subsidized mail delivery service that travels both interplanetary AND interstellar routes, which can have an impact on backwater and "basket case" economies far beyond the mere monetary bean counting. Indeed, I would even go so far as to say that the "less important" a world or system is, the greater the impact of having a mail delivery starship making regular visits every year would be. Being able to correspond both in-system and out-system can have value (political, economic, military, social, cultural, etc.) that is hard to put a monetary value on, but which can make a large difference in both quality of life and a sense of "connectedness" with the rest of the Imperium.

 

[kilemall]

It's a Courier starship.
It is purpose built to fill its niche role (Mail Vault transport) at a balance point between cost, reasonable reliability (unlikely to be intercepted), with a high operational tempo being the expectation and guaranteed profitability on every mail delivery (very nearly regardless of where the destination is).

It does what it's designed to do very very well ... a combination of interstellar AND interplanetary courier duty (specifically mail deliveries).

As I've already detailed, it is even possible for the ship to turn a profit for the subsidizing government over 40 years worth of deliveries, using only the 50% of gross revenue that accrues to the subsidizing government. So on a purely monetary basis, it's a fair expectation to at least break even over that 40 years of operation ... which of course ignores all the the indirect benefits (monetary and otherwise) that result from a subsidized mail delivery service that travels both interplanetary AND interstellar routes, which can have an impact on backwater and "basket case" economies far beyond the mere monetary bean counting. Indeed, I would even go so far as to say that the "less important" a world or system is, the greater the impact of having a mail delivery starship making regular visits every year would be. Being able to correspond both in-system and out-system can have value (political, economic, military, social, cultural, etc.) that is hard to put a monetary value on, but which can make a large difference in both quality of life and a sense of "connectedness" with the rest of the Imperium.

I'd agree with all of the above for the general concept, my final point was to the J-2/6-G version, which I did not make clear except by inference in the reference to larger cargo space.


I wouldn't bother if I though it was totally useless, I do like the business model when subsidized, but 6-G/no options/no rest and fully funded interplanetary runs, eh, not as bueno.

 

[whartung]

A 200 ton 6G ship (Book 2) costs 48MCr more than a 2G ship, not counting impact on crew and free space.

That's more than the cost of an entire 200 ton J1/M1 Free Trader. A 2G upgrade on the Free Trader is 12MCr, not counting loss of free space or maintenance.

When you consider expenses, a standard Free Trader is a 2.5MCr per year business, just to break even. The bulk of that expense, is the mortgage. About 70% of the monthly costs. (The second largest cost for a Jump ship is fuel, ~13%).

Folks that like to run businesses, like to run gross margins of 30%, over 700KCr per year.

It would have to be spectacularly lucrative to pay off that extra 48MCr to justify getting 6G.

 

[Spinward Flow]

by inference in the reference to larger cargo space.

And my reply to that inference is that cargo (standard or speculative) will often times wind up creating delays in scheduling (although creative time management by the crew CAN mitigate that issue).

For example ... if there is cargo to be shipped out of the system which hasn't been delivered to a spaceport/starport yet, negotiations for the acquisition/pickup of that cargo can be done over comm channels (business by trideophone?) while interplanetary deliveries are being made. That way, the cargo is available for loading upon the Spinward Courier's arrival at that port, 4 days after completing the deal for transport, where the ship isn't sitting in docked in a berth waiting for the cargo the entire time but rather doing its interplanetary mail deliveries. This then gets back to the point I made about having multiple destinations to deliver to in-system, where if there are 3 worlds to deliver to you can actually make 5 deliveries (1.2.3.2.1) before jumping out of the system. So if there's a cargo bound out-system on world 1, you can negotiate for pickup of that cargo upon return to world 1 from the "tour" around the system (1.2.3.2.1) so there is minimal time spent docked in a berth at world 1 for the loading to complete. Of course, the larger the cargo bay, the longer it will take to load and empty it (and the loading and unloading of a 1 ton cargo bay is about as quick as it gets).

The Spinward Courier can already pull off this stunt with its 1 ton cargo bay, which I know sounds like next to nothing (because it is), but it also means that the crew can essentially agree to transport high value/small cargo on either a contract basis or on speculation. The point is that the contents of the cargo bay amount to essentially "side business" opportunities that can arise along their route, rather than the primary means of funding ship operations and overhead (since the mail deliveries do that).

However, if you shift the balance more in favor of cargo as the primary business model, with the mail deliveries as a "side business" used to help defray operating costs, you'll quickly find yourself right back in the mode of only wanting to run the most lucrative trade routes for the greatest returns, rather than putting yourself (as a crew) into a position where you can earn a profit EVERYWHERE you go(!) so long as there is a population center there to deliver mail to.

It's the difference between mail delivery being the main business case, with cargo on the side ... and cargo being the main business, with mail delivery on the side. The specializations of business model yield significantly different economic pressures and incentives, leading to wildly diverging engineering imperatives.

Like I've said, the Spinward Courier fills a decidedly niche role (basically that of a traveling post office) that is usually unprofitable for other starship types to undertake, reducing the competitive pressure for the routes it would be contracted to run.

I wouldn't bother if I though it was totally useless, I do like the business model when subsidized, but 6-G/no options/no rest and fully funded interplanetary runs, eh, not as bueno.

It's definitely "out there" as a business model, relative to the more mainstream Free/Far/Fat Trader possibilities (to either get fabulously wealthy or go bankrupt on speculation). The fact that the ship can still turn a profit under subsidy, which takes 50% of the gross revenue receipts, was just about the largest handicap I could give the design (aside from bank financing payments, which are just flat out usury rates). Again, it's a financing niche that allows the ship to be acquired and pay back its purchase cost over 40 years without necessarily requiring a massive loss of money for the subsidizing government over those 40 years (break even return on initial investment over 40 years is a likely outcome).

So definitely not a Trillion Credit Squadron via Merchant Prince endeavor, but the design does yield a consistent profit at every port of call so long as there is a population there at that port of call. The business model of steady small increments of profit everywhere you go then relies on a fast tempo of deliveries to maximize profit returns over time, rather than getting lucky on speculation.

Speculative trade might be more lucrative in the shorter term, if you can get lucky and find a sweet spot of a trade route, but the Feast Or Famine nature of speculative trade means that some will get lucky while others go bankrupt and fail as business ventures. Speculative trade also has a very different rhythm to its operations and a more limited range of lucrative opportunities, rather than being a "profit everywhere you go" business model.

So in terms of business opportunities, it's kind of the difference between a business model of lots of small returns everywhere you go adding up over time versus what essentially amounts to "whale hunting" for the big score whenever you can manage to get it. Each business model has their pros and cons ... the difference is the reliability of profit margins ... small but consistent (low risk) versus potentially large but also decidedly intermittent (higher risk).

Remember, the whole idea was to serve a niche market "need" that doesn't have a whole lot of competition going after it (because, backwater and "basket case" economic worlds). Sheer biodiversity studies on Terra alone have demonstrated that it's possible to survive and even thrive in an evolutionary niche role where there is little competition. That is what is being accomplished here ... and doing so in a design package quite unlike anything else that I have seen posted anywhere else in this forum, because of the emphasis on interplanetary opportunities that most designs skip right past with their slow 1G maneuver drives (due to a lack of expanded star system details beyond the mainworld's UWP codes).

A 200 ton 6G ship (Book 2) costs 48MCr more than a 2G ship, not counting impact on crew and free space.

That's more than the cost of an entire 200 ton J1/M1 Free Trader. A 2G upgrade on the Free Trader is 12MCr, not counting loss of free space or maintenance.

When you consider expenses, a standard Free Trader is a 2.5MCr per year business, just to break even. The bulk of that expense, is the mortgage. About 70% of the monthly costs. (The second largest cost for a Jump ship is fuel, ~13%).

By contrast, my Spinward Courier is costing MCr 3.563586 per year to break even under bank financing ... or ... MCr 0.264602 per year under subsidy or when paid off. That's a difference of an extra MCr 3.298984 per year that would need to go to bank financing (I'm not kidding about the usury for bank financing!).

But being able to break even on Cr 264,602 (not including berthing fees at starports/spaceports) of operational overhead isn't that hard for a crew to do with a guaranteed revenue payout of Cr 12,500 per delivery. So a crew can break even on starship overhead costs with as little as 22 mail deliveries per year(!) ... with every additional mail delivery beyond those 22 per year being profit that goes into the crew's pockets. When you can make multiple deliveries within a week while in-system (quick mail runs between worlds and their moons would be especially profitable!) the profits can start adding up relatively quickly. Exactly HOW quickly depends on the details of the worlds, moons and orbits involved in each system the Spinward Courier jumps into, so there will be something of a "terrain dependency" for the quantity and speed of interplanetary mail deliveries (some systems will allow for lots of them, such as Regina/Regina/Spinward Marches, while others will have a population in only one place in-system, so a "one and done" scenario).

Folks that like to run businesses, like to run gross margins of 30%, over 700KCr per year.

Well, as I already detailed with the example of the Regina system, there's an opportunity there for a mail delivery starship to earn MCr 0.3 per month on a subsidized mail contract, where the government is getting 50% of the gross revenue. Which is admittedly something of a special case ... but it isn't going to be the only star system where a population can have colonized multiple worlds in-system, all of which can have a demand for physical X-mail deliveries to be transported to them, which a courier can then get paid for making.

Mind you, a privately owned courier ship that is already paid off (so no 50% revenue rake) could be making in excess of MCr 0.5 per month ... not per year ... per month simply shuttling around the Regina system (with a micro Jump-0 in the route) delivering nothing but X-mail. If that doesn't get you to sit up and smell the potential profits to be made, I don't know what will. :coffeesip:

It would have to be spectacularly lucrative to pay off that extra 48MCr to justify getting 6G.

Well ... if there's "no interplanetary" beyond the mainworld, then that 6G drive is definitely a waste of money and cargo capacity.

If there is interplanetary trade beyond the mainworld, that interplanetary trade can wind up being more lucrative in some cases than jumping to the next star system (obviously details will vary). In that case, having a 6G maneuver drive would then open up opportunities for interplanetary trade that would otherwise be closed to a ship with a 1G maneuver drive. However, as with all things, it's an engineering/financing compromise which ultimately needs to be driven by the preferred business model used in the ship's standard operations.

 

[whartung]

If there is interplanetary trade beyond the mainworld, that interplanetary trade can wind up being more lucrative in some cases than jumping to the next star system (obviously details will vary). In that case, having a 6G maneuver drive would then open up opportunities for interplanetary trade that would otherwise be closed to a ship with a 1G maneuver drive. However, as with all things, it's an engineering/financing compromise which ultimately needs to be driven by the preferred business model used in the ship's standard operations.

If something "can" be, then it "will" be.

While a market for such a ship may well be lucrative, lucrative markets draw other participants until the market is no longer lucrative.

The barrier to entry in this market does not seem particularly steep, which mean lots of players, which means opportunity for control of a route goes down.

 

[Spinward Flow]

If something "can" be, then it "will" be.

While a market for such a ship may well be lucrative, lucrative markets draw other participants until the market is no longer lucrative.

The barrier to entry in this market does not seem particularly steep, which mean lots of players, which means opportunity for control of a route goes down.

And yet ... this is the first time anyone on this forum has pointed this out and provided the necessary support (ship design, business model, etc.) to open up this up until now completely ignored market.

Hmmm ... funny that ...

 

[Grav_Moped]

The unique part is claiming multiple instances of the the Mail Subsidy for distinct destinations within a system. It's a pretty insightful house rule, with some interesting implications. This is definitely a gap in the existing trade rules (and system generation) that was left for referees to fill, if they recognized it existed.

 

[Spinward Flow]

The unique part is claiming multiple instances of the the Mail Subsidy for distinct destinations within a system.
It's a pretty insightful house rule, with some interesting implications.
This is definitely a gap in the existing trade rules (and system generation) that was left for referees to fill, if they recognized it existed.

I guess this means that at some point I'm going to have to see if there is a "market challenge" opportunity using a Tender/Rider configuration of this same idea, where the small craft has the 6G maneuver drive and the Mail Vault and can be carried through jump by a Tender that has Jump-2 and Maneuver-2. So the Tender would be a mainworld only kind of deal, while the small craft are given the interplanetary "legwork" tasking.

The problem that arises instantly from that sort of thing is ... crew and life support. At a minimum, you would wind up with a crew of 1 on the tender (Pilot) and 2 on the small craft (Pilot and Gunner), but as already detailed upthread a 2G version would have an extra 24 tons of cargo space over and above the 6G "all in one" ship design, which would work out just fine for an extra stateroom (or two, for the additional crew needed) plus a 20 ton Fast Gig that carries the Mail Vault to do all the interplanetary mail deliveries.

Such a redesign would, of course, alter the delicate balance of economics and standard operations that I've got going with the "all in one" starship design I've already presented, but it might be worth considering just for the Compare And Contrast factors. It would also offer a ready made purely sublight in-system X-mail delivery option. Curiously though, I think that such a small craft plus tender design would necessarily need to be a lower tech level so the design can be more widely supported (in-system annual overhauls only) on the small craft design with no tender for the pure interplanetary niche market application.

You see what happens when you give me Ideas about my own Ideas?

 

[Grav_Moped]

The small craft crew staterooms can be in the small craft themselves.
Probably wouldn't want to use "small craft staterooms", but instead half-sized starship staterooms (implied by LBB2, explicitly legal in LBB5) for their better life support systems. Maybe also have double-occupancy staterooms for the small craft crews on the mothership -- between the two, each crewman gets a full stateroom. This matters for morale purposes (see T5 for one rules implementation).

The multiplicity of weapons and down-rated computers in the carried craft (unless you want to waste at least 2Td in each carried small craft) will raise capital costs.

But this makes it a more interesting RP game platform.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Okay, this is an unexpected result for the Tender/Rider alternative. o:

Tender @ TL=10 (LBB5.80)
100 ton, Configuration: 7
Jump-1, Maneuver-1, Power Plant-1, 11 tons of fuel, fuel purification plant, model/1 computer, 3 staterooms (Pilot, Ship's Boat pilot, Gunner), unarmed, 16.9 tons of cargo and 10 tons of collapsible fuel tank (adds +1 parsec of range as a flex option).
First Ship: MCr 29.041 / Additional Production: MCr 23.2328

Mail Boat @ TL=10 (LBB5.80)
25 ton, Configuration: 6 (fuel scoops)
Maneuver-6, Power Plant-6, 2.25 tons of fuel (6 weeks), bridge (Ship's Boat pilot, Gunner), model/1 computer, dual turret (sandcaster, missile rack), 2 ton small craft cabin (extends crew endurance beyond 12 hours of combat to 24 hours of routine operations), Mail Vault.
First Ship: MCr 20.85 / Additional Production: MCr 16.68

Total combined cost
First Ship: MCr 49.891 / Additional Production: MCr 39.9128



Operational profile is that the Tender only goes to the mainworld (1G maneuver drive), while the Mail Boat gets dispatched to do all of the interplanetary mail deliveries in-system. So while the mail is getting delivered by the Mail Boat, the Tender's Pilot/Captain can negotiate for up to 16 tons of cargo to transport out-system ... so there's the speculative cargo option. If the Tender needs to transit across 2 parsecs, it can fill the 10 ton collapsible fuel tank in the cargo bay, leaving 6.9 tons of cargo space available. Since the Tender is a dispersed structure, it remains orbital at all times, but the 6G Mail Boat can make mail deliveries to surface under atmosphere if needed.

If wilderness refueling is an option in-system, the Mail Boat will need to make 5 scoop runs to fill 11 tons of fuel on the Tender (or 10 scoop runs for 21 tons of fuel for 2 parsecs of range) plus 1 more scoop run to refill the Mail Boat itself. However, due to the 1G maneuver on the Tender, executing those scoop runs will be faster from a water ocean on a world than they would be at a gas giant (due to the distances involved). So a MCr 1 increase in the cost of the Tender to switch to Configuration: 4 (Close Structure) would seem to be appropriate to help speed up wilderness refueling from gas giants so as to help defray the costs of needing to purchase fuel from a starport. Definitely something worth spending more time thinking about beyond the scope of this quick sneak peek.

For comparison, the "all in one" starship design cost from the start of this thread:
First Ship: MCr 76.13 / Additional Ships: MCr 60.904

Although to be fair, MCr 5 of that "all in one" starship price difference is due to model/2 computer versus model/1 and model/1.



So the Tender+Mail Boat variation costs 65.5% the purchase price of the Starship Only option ... but the Tender+Mail Boat variant will cost Cr 7000 more per 2 weeks on additional life support (+1 stateroom and a double occupancy cabin) and crew salary (+1 pilot). So cheaper to buy but more expensive to operate. I haven't run the numbers on the business model economics because I'm just doing a quick view of where the ship designs wind up landing, but I can easily imagine that crew profit margins shrunk by the additional life support and crew salary can be increased relatively easily just by transporting cargo (standard or speculative).

I also took a quick look at what switching to a Jump-2 Tender (still with 1G maneuver) and 2 parsecs of internal fuel @ TL=11 ... and the cargo bay had to shrink down to only 3 tons while the Tender's first ship construction cost rises by about MCr 15. Given the tradeoff between 16.9 tons of cargo space which can allow 2 parsecs in 2 weeks when necessary to leave the jump 1 main versus 3 tons of cargo space to allow 2 parsecs in 1 week to achieve jump 2 performance ... just doesn't seem worth it when weighing the cargo revenue potential loss (even under a subsidy). So in this case, I'm thinking the Jump-1 for 2 parsecs option offers more flexibility and therefore greater revenue generating potential.



So yes ... a very interesting alternative that I may need to do a proper write up on.

 

[whartung]

And yet ... this is the first time anyone on this forum has pointed this out and provided the necessary support (ship design, business model, etc.) to open up this up until now completely ignored market.

Hmmm ... funny that ...

The market is documented, we don't know if it's ignored just because we're learning of it today.

There's a million things on Wikipedia that folks do everyday that we all don't know about. They know, you may know, I don't know though.

I await the next segment when we learn about the necessary rolls of Streetwise, Administration, Bribery, and Prostitution skills that are necessary to get the mail contract in the first place, with DM based on government level, of course.

But of course you can't get a contract without a ship. So, you need to buy your ship first and hope you get the contract.

 

[Spinward Flow]

But of course you can't get a contract without a ship. So, you need to buy your ship first and hope you get the contract.

Actually, the answer to this is provided.

the character must make the 20% down payment, with the government assuming responsibility for the payments upon delivery, and taking 50% of the gross receipts of the ship while in service. The character is responsible for all expenses and costs of operation.

All you need to be eligible for a subsidy arrangement is paying the 20% down payment for construction. If you can do that, then you're eligible for a subsidy.

Now, whether the subsidy will be granted (by the Referee) is the next step in the process, but "obtaining" the ship for the subsidy doesn't require a full payoff of a ship to start.

 

[Spinward Flow]

The small craft crew staterooms can be in the small craft themselves.

It's certainly possible to accommodate the small craft crew with space aboard the small craft, but doing so will necessarily force an increase in the tonnage of the small craft in order to contain those accommodations. When a small craft has a bridge (20%), 6G maneuver (17%), power plant-6 (18% @ TL=9-12), fuel (6%), totaling 61% of displacement ... 1 ton of computer, 1 ton of fire control, 5 tons of Mail Vault and even just 2 tons worth of cabin totals up to 9 tons.
(1+1+5+2) / (1-0.61) = 23.08 tons minimum (round up to 24 or 25 tons of craft)

Bumping the accommodations up to a pair of 2 ton cabins totals 11 tons of fixed defined tonnage to wrap the rest of the small craft around.
(1+1+5+2+2) / (1-0.61) = 28.21 tons minimum (round up to 30 tons of craft)
30 - (30*0.61) - 11 = 29.3 tons ... so 0.7 tons unallocated.

So assigning a pair of single occupancy 4 ton starship staterooms to the Ship's Boat pilot and Gunner then pushes the displacement of the small craft up to the point where it's better to drop the bridge (so only 41% of tonnage is drives and fuel) and buy a model/2 computer instead (that functions as a model/1 due to the lack of a bridge) and 2 acceleration couches.
(1+1+2+5+4+4) / (1-0.41) = 28.82 tons minimum (round up to 30 tons of craft)
30 - (30*0.41) - 17 = 29.3 tons ... so 0.7 tons unallocated.

Costs MCr 7.4 more to do things that way (a +30% increase! ), but it's smaller (and therefore cheaper in hull and drive costs) to do it that way (single occupancy staterooms instead of single occupancy cabins) than to retain the bridge. That's enough of a price increase that I am loathe to take that path. CAN be done and SHOULD be done are different questions after all.

I also need to think of the small craft in a broader context than just merely interstellar operations. Ideally speaking the small craft ought to be something that can be acquired as an independent purchase for purely interplanetary X-mail delivery runs, with the Tender only needed as a way to transport the mail courier small craft over interstellar distances. That way, the small craft has a sort of "dual use" role beyond merely being a small craft for the Tender.

Probably wouldn't want to use "small craft staterooms", but instead half-sized starship staterooms (implied by LBB2, explicitly legal in LBB5) for their better life support systems.

Already ahead of you on that score, especially since I'm usually winding up with some extra fuel capacity and/or very modest cargo space (less than 1 ton unused), so power plant endurance is usually in the 5-6 weeks range depending on various details. But yes, not paying for the "cheap" life support option of small craft cabins which features less redundant life support capacity.

Maybe also have double-occupancy staterooms for the small craft crews on the mothership -- between the two, each crewman gets a full stateroom. This matters for morale purposes (see T5 for one rules implementation).

Right now, I'm working on a basic handicap assumption of needing single occupancy staterooms on board the Tender plus single occupancy cabins on the small craft. That way the default is single occupancy all around for normal operations, so as to leave the double occupancy configuration for disaster and rescue operations as a reserve capacity.

But this makes it a more interesting RP game platform.

It's more complex, since there are 2 vessels instead of just 1 ... but you are right that it is also enabling a more interesting RP game platform in addition to enabling a more diverse set of trading options. Haven't quite settled on a final design proposal yet (still testing various configurations and options to see if there is any more performance that can be squeezed out of it). I'll probably wind up posting the results in its own (new) thread since the design is enough of a departure from the "all in one" Spinward Courier design (even though the Tender/Rider variation on the idea is very much inspired by this thread).

I'm also kind of curious to see if the reduction in build price would be enough for the Tender/Rider version to be able to break even on making bank loan payments through small scale speculative trading (10-20 tons per jump kind of thing).

 

[whartung]

Actually, the answer to this is provided.



All you need to be eligible for a subsidy arrangement is paying the 20% down payment for construction. If you can do that, then you're eligible for a subsidy.

Now, whether the subsidy will be granted (by the Referee) is the next step in the process, but "obtaining" the ship for the subsidy doesn't require a full payoff of a ship to start.

You need to pony up over 15MCr, plus take on the 300+KCr mortgage while waiting for subsidy you may not get, and that they are not obligated to offer.

That's a lot of pocket change for a maybe. You put up half that much you get a Free Trader which at least doesn't become a complete albatross (since your ship is specialized for this milk run) if you don't get the contract, since the ships are so ubiquitous. Likely a much better bet.

Your ship is fine for rich people wanting to get richer who could afford such a risk, or a franchise mega-operation where they buy the ship and then pay you to run it.

 

[Spinward Flow]

You need to pony up over 15MCr, plus take on the 300+KCr mortgage while waiting for subsidy you may not get, and that they are not obligated to offer.

Uh ... no?

Let me quote the answer to you again and put what you apparently missed in bold for obviousness.

the character must make the 20% down payment, with the government assuming responsibility for the payments upon delivery, and taking 50% of the gross receipts of the ship while in service. The character is responsible for all expenses and costs of operation.

And to be fair ... this isn't something where a PC puts in a down payment on a ship and then shops around for governments to subsidize them while the ship is under construction. Usually there would be an Understanding Of Intent memorandum issued by the subsidizing government prior to the down payment being made to the shipyard by the PC, where the subsidizing government agrees to take over/pay off the mortgage on the ship once construction has been completed (spoiler alert, ships aren't built "instantly") so there will be time (weeks and weeks of time!) to get all the documents in order and the arrangements made and signed off on. That way, once the ship is delivered from the shipyard, everything is set and ready for the subsidizing government side of the ledger and the captain of the ship simply needs to have rounded up a crew to begin operations.

That's a lot of pocket change for a maybe.

The PC only has to make the down payment with a subsidized ship.

Your ship is fine for rich people wanting to get richer who could afford such a risk, or a franchise mega-operation where they buy the ship and then pay you to run it.

ANY entity, public or private (or even a public/private partnership) that can operate a Spinward Courier in either a paid off or subsidized financial condition is basically guaranteed to make profits. So if you can buy one with "cold hard cash" and fully pay it off upon delivery as a private business entity, you'll earn back the cost of buying the ship in 20-25 years without a 50% subsidy rake. If you can find systems (like Regina) that have numerous population centers on multiple worlds within the system, you could be making multiple MCr per year in profits just making mail deliveries. In other words, as a private entity, once you can pay for 1 of these ships, you can make enough deliveries to be able to buy 2 of these ships after 40 years because of the profit margin.

In other words, there is the opportunity for slow but steady and reliable compounding growth over time. It's not a "get rich quick" scheme like hitting the jackpot on speculation ... but it is also a business model that is really hard to screw up (and if you do, it's basically a matter of incompetence).

 

[kilemall]

You and I are just not going to see eye to eye on the interplanetary aspect. Other then a spreading favors through control of mail franchise scenario, a small craft is just so much cheaper that the whole valuation of what it costs for M-drive delivery drops precipitously.

But let's say they do.


Just an off-the-shelf 6-G Ship's Boat is MCr 16, whatever subsector polity paying for the mail contract can subsidize one such small craft per system for four systems and still come in under the price of one of your inter/intrasystem couriers, plus reconfigure for passenger/staterooms or extra cargo in addition to the mail vault.

Something like 3/8 of the cost of the fast jump courier- to underscore my perception of what likely would happen, the subsidizing polity could reduce the mail delivery cost to Cr12000 and still have more profit baked in per local run. And if the full Cr25000 is paid, there will be small craft flocking to cover the market.

Assuming the full price is paid for the mail rounds, the ONLY reason to not have local small craft delivery is that the outlying colonies are too sparse to support bi-weekly or monthly mail runs.


Another point- by dropping from 6-G to 4-G, absolutely no other changes, the ship gains 10 tons of cargo or other repurposing and sheds MCr 15 in cost. On average that's going to be a per month mortgage drop of Cr 62500. The ship owner/operator gets a Cr31250 'bonus' of lower costs vs. losing one interplanetary run still puts them ahead AND having a more versatile ship seems no-brainer to me.



Finally, I literally don't get your critique of how building in speculation/charter is going to ruin the whole concept. The routes to go to backwater planets that won't see a ship otherwise is built into the subsidized merchant concept. That's why it's done.

According to the usual verbiage it's 2-12 worlds on the route. So assuming we ignore the small craft solution for most, instead of say an average of 7 systems being serviced, perhaps it's 4 with several minor port stops along the way.

Fine, so our postal heroes are locked into specific routes 70% of the year and have enough time to do maintenance and get into shenanigans and back with the extra leftover two months. They aren't GOING to get optimal routes, that's why they got a subsidy in the first place.

But you can roll speculative cargo no matter where you are. The rules state you can buy partial lots so filling up the hold should be no problem in most cases. Many of the deals will have bad buy/sell trade code DM pairs you walk away from, it won't be gravy runs, but definitely doable- all it takes is a few per year to upgrade or a few years eventually pay off the debt. Plus be able to fit in an ATV, a fighter or other gear and you've got a nice light shenanigans ship.

Do the one-day turnround for bad speculation routes and not even try, hang for the couple days for the speculation try then stay for the loading or not.


As for the more desirable speculation mail routes vs. not, well, that's what carousing bribery and admin are for, no? I expect there is a whole mail route pecking order/patronage system as to who gets them. Seniority? Best bribe? Best mailman/secret agent service to the Glorious Polity? MOAR play options!

 

[Spinward Flow]

Just noticed another curious unintended (but rather welcome!) bit of synergy for the Tender+Boat variation.

By upsizing the Mail Boat to 30 tons, in order to accommodate a pair of 2 ton starship cabins to enable single occupancy for the crew of 2 (Ship's Boat Pilot and Gunner), the tonnage of the drives increases (because, LBB5.80).

At 30 tons of small craft, a 6G maneuver drive displaces 5.1 tons ... which is enough to tug 102 tons of ship at 2G (102*0.05=5.1).

Which means, that the Tender can be given a 1G maneuver drive, but with the Boat docked the 6G Boat can "maneuver tug" the combined Tender+Boat (100 total tons) at 2G maneuver while the Tender's maneuver drive is idled (so only the Boat is applying maneuver acceleration/thrust). This would then offer a kind of "backdoor" way to achieve a 2G maneuver rating ... just as the Tender is a way to give the Boat a jump capacity.

Being able to achieve 2G acceleration when using the Boat as a "maneuver tug" for the Tender then makes it possible to safely VTOL the Tender on 1g or higher surface gravity worlds (world size code: 8+), which then means that water ocean wilderness refueling of the Tender is possible on any terrestrial world so long as the Mail Boat hasn't been dispatched (yet) for interplanetary mail deliveries. Since the standard operating procedure would be to jump into systems in orbit around the mainworld (or as close as jump shadows will allow), the first order of business after completing the standard 16 hours of maintenance checks would be to refuel the Tender and the Mail Boat wouldn't be dispatched on interplanetary mail deliveries until the Tender is safely berthed at the starport/spaceport. Once the Tender is berthed and parked, then the Mail Boat would begin making mail deliveries around the system while the Tender captain conducts cargo sales/acquisitions at the mainworld.

Just one of those curious bits of synergy that I wasn't expecting to find, but now that I have I am even more interested in this Tender+Boat combination, since it makes the two vessels somewhat uniquely well suited to each other.

I know that the Tender would be "much more efficient" at 200 tons than at 100 tons (way more room for cargo!), but that increase would also force an increase in the amount of required crew (+1 engineer, +1 medic) with the attendant increase in life support and crew salaries overhead, which then puts a really major crimp into the profit margin that can be made in a "one and done" mainworld only system that doesn't have any other interplanetary settlements to deliver to. However, the increase to 200 tons for the Tender would also very nearly double the build cost, pretty much wiping out a lot of the build cost savings relative to the "all in one" Spinward Courier starship design.

Right now with a 100 ton Tender and a 30 ton Mail Boat the first ship in class build prices are combining to weigh in around MCr 57 for both vessels, which then translates into a MCr 45.6 cost for additional vessels in volume production ... so approximately 75% of the build cost of an "all in one" Spinward Courier.

Since the Mail Boat is intended to be a design that can be ordered for construction independently of the Tender, so as to provide a "sublight only" in-system interplanetary X-mail delivery option for both public and private courier services, an expectation of being able to jump the Mail Boat to other star systems with higher tech level (13+) starports to conduct annual overhauls becomes a non-starter. So instead, the Mail Boat needs to be as "low tech" as reasonable for its performance profile in order to make the design something that could be built and maintained locally in the widest possible number of star systems that have type A or B starports when it comes to annual overhauls. For this reason, I settled upon using TL=10 for the Tender and the Mail Boat as the best compromise between high and low tech. TL=10 is high enough to get the +2 tech level modifier for the Sandcaster, while also being low enough to be something that can be manufactured at starports in even the Vilis subsector of the Spinward Marches (Frenzie, Garda-Vilis, Vilis and Denotam are all TL=10 with either type A or B starports).

TL=10+ type B starports could manufacture the Mail Boat.
TL=10+ type A starports could manufacture the Tender and the Mail Boat.
TL=10+ type A or B starports could perform annual overhauls of the Tender and the Mail Boat.

Higher tech level "refresh" updates of the Tender+Mail Boat designs at TL=13 and TL=15 would of course be possible, but such updated versions would wind up being "tethered" to their need for annual overhauls at such higher tech level starports each year, so they would only be able to stray "but so far" away from such higher tech starport facilities before becoming largely unsupportable from technological manufacturing standpoint. As previously detailed, in the Spinward Marches sector there are only 19 systems with a TL=13+ type A or B starport, so this "tethering" to annual maintenance facilities can have an impact on the routes the Tender would need to run in order to have access to those facilities as part of a regular interstellar route. But, if that kind of "tethering" to the availability of higher tech maintenance facilities is not a problem, then purchasing a higher tech version of the Tender+Boat design may be worth the (reduced) investment costs, since at higher tech levels the power plant can be smaller and therefore cheaper (as can the fuel purification plant) allowing for more cargo space.

Looks like I've got my work cut out for me working up multiple tech level versions of the Tender+Mail Boat concept.