Trader sizes

[whartung]

Stolen from the Shipyards thead.

In discussing trade volumes and ships sizes.

Incidentally, there can't be all THAT many small ships, because bigger ships are more economical, and if you have enough freight or passengers to keep two ships in business, you could do it cheaper with one twice the size. There are countervailing considerations, not the least that the traffic probably will be split between several competing companies, but you won't see many companies running scores of ships on a single link in a route. And passenger traffic is more likely to be split among several ships in order to provide more frequent connections.

The Free Trader is ubiquitous in Traveller as effectively the mini-van of the galaxy. It's as small as it is because it's balanced between affordability and capability as owned and managed by sole proprietor. The independent captain.

That said, the FT is not necessarily the most efficient cargo ship available. The larger ships give more bang/buck, but take lots of bucks to even start with. The large corporations, on the other hand, can choose the most efficient hulls possible.

But there may be other constraints on size that go unsaid.

Here on Sol III, the ports have limitations as to how big of a ship they can handle. The size of the dock, the capabilities of the cranes. The Panama Canal still has some impact on ship design. The large bulk oil carriers show us more the practical limits of commercial ship building, but the container ships don't seem to approach those sizes.

Now, in orbit, it may simply not matter how big the ship is. As long as it has a big enough door to shuttle the cargo tugs through efficiently, maybe anything goes. On the ground, for a sea going ship, the dock and crane is far more efficient that using ferry boats to move cargo back and forth. Heck, I think during WWII, they just beached ships for expediency of unloading then pulled them off (that's a guess, I don't know, but I think we had some specialized landing ships that could do that).

In orbit that whole hard dock may have simply been hand waved away. That's just never done, and it's all shuttles and tugs. 1000dT streamlined landing ferry to move orbital supplies dirt side. Hard to say.

So, maybe there is no external consideration for ship size beyond simply traffic loads (no reason to jump with empty bays) and/or tech level.

But I can see that over time, the gap between the size of a Free Trader and a corporate cargo vessel would just get larger and larger, with the mid range ships being scrapped or reduced to specialty runs.

 

[flykiller]

a larger ship is more efficient only when operating between limited points of departure and delivery. ground-side transportation costs, however, may be significant. a starship is cost-insensitive as to where it acquires and delivers cargo, and a free-trader does not need a large volume to be cost-effective, thus a freetrader can go directly to where the cargo is generated and then directly to where the cargo is delivered, thus eliminating groundside transportation costs.

 

[SpaceBadger]

Another factor in freighter size is whether or not you have grav tech IYTU. In the OTU even really big ships can land at a port because they have grav tech to let them enter atmosphere and land as slowly as necessary to avoid burning up (although I wonder about ground pressure from their landing skids when on the ground - maybe they keep gravs running constantly to avoid cracking concrete?)

IMTU there is no grav tech, no reactionless thruster, so interface between orbit and planet surface is important. Big freighters have to either dock with a station in orbit or send down shuttles, because they can't land. Even if streamlined, their mass/weight would destroy any airstrip they tried to land on, and the fuel cost of getting that big ship back up off the ground again would be huge.

That creates a niche for smaller free traders in frontier systems which may be lacking interface infrastructure (orbital highport or shuttles on standby), as the smaller ship can be streamlined to land on planet itself, won't destroy the aiirfield when it lands, and is not as expensive as the larger ship to move back to orbit again. Even so, many free traders carry at least one small craft to use for smaller cargoes or passengers, to save what is still a pretty big fuel cost for landing/lifting the ship itself.

 

[Enoki]

a larger ship is more efficient only when operating between limited points of departure and delivery. ground-side transportation costs, however, may be significant. a starship is cost-insensitive as to where it acquires and delivers cargo, and a free-trader does not need a large volume to be cost-effective, thus a freetrader can go directly to where the cargo is generated and then directly to where the cargo is delivered, thus eliminating groundside transportation costs.

A larger subsidized or company owned transport of 1000 to 2000 tons operating on a scheduled route between a number of worlds ending up back at a single distribution (starting and ending) point would be very efficent too.
Here the ship is carrying cargo for all the worlds on the route and delivers and picks up each in turn. It would deliver between worlds and also deliver to the central point for shipping elsewhere besides the route.
This would be a modified version of the "FedEx" model.

Free and Far traders being less scheduled would be more efficent on irregular routes or on ones where speculation and cargo are less certain. They would also be more dependent on passengers, particularly lower paying mid and low ones, sort of like a bus line where the larger cargo ships might not want to be bothered with the logistics and crew necessary to handle passengers.

 

[Carlobrand]

... Heck, I think during WWII, they just beached ships for expediency of unloading then pulled them off (that's a guess, I don't know, but I think we had some specialized landing ships that could do that)...

LST: Landing Ship, Tank. Wide beam, shallow draught, front end rides shallower than the butt end, ballast system so it can ride higher when going in to beach and lower (so it doesn't roll in high waves) when it's at sea. Very clever ship. I saw one in operation many, many years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_Ship,_Tank

a larger ship is more efficient only when operating between limited points of departure and delivery. ground-side transportation costs, however, may be significant. a starship is cost-insensitive as to where it acquires and delivers cargo, and a free-trader does not need a large volume to be cost-effective, thus a freetrader can go directly to where the cargo is generated and then directly to where the cargo is delivered, thus eliminating groundside transportation costs.

That's assuming they let you go there. High volume port may set limits on how many small ships can land in any given day, in order to encourage larger ships and reduce traffic control demands, and groundside transportation's actually pretty cheap once gravs and decent batteries show up.

 

[whartung]

That's assuming they let you go there. High volume port may set limits on how many small ships can land in any given day, in order to encourage larger ships and reduce traffic control demands, and groundside transportation's actually pretty cheap once gravs and decent batteries show up.

What kind of things do you think would drive limits at a port, either dirt side of high port? What parts of the operation do you think do not scale or are implicitly limited?

 

[rancke]

The Free Trader is ubiquitous in Traveller as effectively the mini-van of the galaxy. It's as small as it is because it's balanced between affordability and capability as owned and managed by sole proprietor. The independent captain.

I don't think Free Traders are all that common in the TU. I see the prevalence of small ships in Traveller material as the result of selection bias, pure and simple. That's the sort of ships player characters are most likely to serve on, so that's the kind of ships referees have the greatest need for.

Also, canon starship economics to the contrary notwithstanding, I can't believe in purpose-built free traders. I just don't see any bank approving an unsecured multi-million credit loan based on the business plan "I'm going to jump around at will and see if I can pick up enough odd freight and passengers and speculative cargoes to stay in the black." So the way I see it, 200T starships are built for regular companies for regular service and are used for 40 years before being sold off to optimistic would-be starship owners. (9 out of 10 of which goes bankrupt within 10 years whereupon the bank seizes the ship and sells it off to the next bunch of optimists).


Hans

 

[Timerover51]

I probably will regret posting this, as the ideas are based on historical data derived from my Army logistic background, and from studying trading patterns throughout history, along with current ships types and usage. I am aware that using any data from history is viewed with disfavor as Traveller represents the far future, and therefore so radically different as to make any use of history meaningless.

One side note:

LST: Landing Ship, Tank. Wide beam, shallow draught, front end rides shallower than the butt end, ballast system so it can ride higher when going in to beach and lower (so it doesn't roll in high waves) when it's at sea. Very clever ship. I saw one in operation many, many years ago.

Ships like the LST are in common use today among smaller countries that lack major port facilities or in areas like the Caribbean, Indonesia, or the Solomon Islands, where one is used on regular runs from Guadalcanal to the other islands for delivering supplies.

As I see it, there are not going to be a lot of major lines, and those will focus on A and B class starports of worlds with a population in the tens to hundreds of millions or more. Lower population B and your C class starports are the realm of the subsidized merchant. Free Traders cover the C, D, and E class ports, along with low population worlds and also your agricultural worlds with specialized products that may be marketed in small quantities. Free Traders are also going to handle a lot of the deliveries to asteroid belts, and minor outposts in a large stellar system. In effect, the Free Trader, with the smaller ship, is the contract carrier for the equivalent of the UPS, FedEx, DHL, or the Imperium.

 

[McPerth]

What kind of things do you think would drive limits at a port, either dirt side of high port? What parts of the operation do you think do not scale or are implicitly limited?

About dirtside (downport) I agree with some posts here (and in many other threads) that larger shps are not able to land, regardless streamlining. For what I've seen there's a consensus about that, setting the limit about 5000 dtons (though Navals ans Scout bases have dirtside facilities only for 1000 dtons or smaller ships).

About high port, I guess the practical limit (I don't envision a theoretical one, aside fron the size building limits) would depend on the interface capability of the planet in question.

If you dock your large ship (let's say 10000 dtons of cargo) on a planet with only 500 dtons of interface capability per day, of yours you could dock it, but you'll be there for 20 days until your cargo is downloaded. so making it no profitable. Probably this planet would be better for smaller ships with landing capability.

 

[BillDowns]

I probably will regret posting this, as the ideas are based on historical data derived from my Army logistic background, and from studying trading patterns throughout history, along with current ships types and usage. I am aware that using any data from history is viewed with disfavor as Traveller represents the far future, and therefore so radically different as to make any use of history meaningless.

Well, as they say, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

I think your analysis is quite accurate. The only contribution I would add is that I would say the sizing will vary depending upon the sector of operations. A major line in the Spinward Marches will not be the same as one in Core, as will the size of subsidized merchants.

 

[Dragoner]

In supply chain management, one has various transport options with both pros and cons, generally though, 90% of your commerce will be locked into larger transport between developed planets, same as with the ROIC, etc. . This is outside the game reference though, where the free trader acts as a spec market operator or micro-hauler.

 

[DangerousThing]

I probably will regret posting this, as the ideas are based on historical data derived from my Army logistic background, and from studying trading patterns throughout history, along with current ships types and usage. I am aware that using any data from history is viewed with disfavor as Traveller represents the far future, and therefore so radically different as to make any use of history meaningless.

Many postings use historical data to extrapolate future trends. Right now historical data's all we have. As long as you at least give a pointer to your sources...

Most of the people that invented Traveller (those at GDW at the time) were extremely interested in history and based a lot of Traveller off of these historical sources. Though most were interested in older history than we're talking about now. I just love Loren Wiseman's editorials in JTAS when he talks about the birth of Traveller and the types of people at GDW then.

As I see it, there are not going to be a lot of major lines, and those will focus on A and B class starports of worlds with a population in the tens to hundreds of millions or more. Lower population B and your C class starports are the realm of the subsidized merchant. Free Traders cover the C, D, and E class ports, along with low population worlds and also your agricultural worlds with specialized products that may be marketed in small quantities. Free Traders are also going to handle a lot of the deliveries to asteroid belts, and minor outposts in a large stellar system. In effect, the Free Trader, with the smaller ship, is the contract carrier for the equivalent of the UPS, FedEx, DHL, or the Imperium.

For the most part I agree with this.

The one problem is comparing them to UPS etc. In order to make a Free Trader marginally profitable, it must run cargo (speculative stuff bought by the ship's fund) and sell it rather than take freight (stuff you're schlepping for other people for a fixed amount per jump or parsec).

 

[BytePro]

...
As I see it, there are not going to be a lot of major lines, and those will focus on A and B class starports of worlds with a population in the tens to hundreds of millions or more. Lower population B and your C class starports are the realm of the subsidized merchant. Free Traders cover the C, D, and E class ports, along with low population worlds and also your agricultural worlds with specialized products that may be marketed in small quantities. Free Traders are also going to handle a lot of the deliveries to asteroid belts, and minor outposts in a large stellar system. In effect, the Free Trader, with the smaller ship, is the contract carrier for the equivalent of the UPS, FedEx, DHL, or the Imperium.

This.

Major lines are not going to finance large star-freighters where there is no sustainable guarantee of cargo - leaving speculative trading to the small fry...

...Also, canon starship economics to the contrary notwithstanding, I can't believe in purpose-built free traders. I just don't see any bank approving an unsecured multi-million credit loan based on the business plan "I'm going to jump around at will and see if I can pick up enough odd freight and passengers and speculative cargoes to stay in the black." So the way I see it, 200T starships are built for regular companies for regular service and are used for 40 years before being sold off to optimistic would-be starship owners. (9 out of 10 of which goes bankrupt within 10 years whereupon the bank seizes the ship and sells it off to the next bunch of optimists).

The last part is part of why banks would finance the independent speculative traders. Bank gets to re-finance the average small trader several times over. Shipyard gets hefty 20% up front down payment - and the rest typically from the Bank. The yard is likely financed by the Bank. Financing tramp traders keeps the yards in business - and the related industries (also financed by, the Bank) in business. Defaulting affects the yard - not so much the Bank - if the yard's is considered 'loaned' the balance due after down payment to pay costs and expenses, and 'charged-back' (future financing, payments withheld, re-financing required, etc.) on defaults.

This is not unlike the RW in other areas where Banks finance small business and construction projects - knowing full well the failure rates. They 'bank on them' in fact - profiting from the fact that failure rates are predictable. Further, governments often underwrite these losses directly or indirectly in order to stimulate their economy and employment rates...

IM(LBB1-3)TU, the Bank (interstellar) is government 'owned' and operated. That is why it works for jump-delayed interstellar commerce, why the Navy will actively pursue defaulters and starports and local authorities will care - and why there are no interstellar trade taxes, duties or tariffs. It gives the interstellar government another element of powerful indirect control and influence over interstellar commerce - aside from controlling the primary starport.

 

[DangerousThing]

If you dock your large ship (let's say 10000 dtons of cargo) on a planet with only 500 dtons of interface capability per day, of yours you could dock it, but you'll be there for 20 days until your cargo is downloaded. so making it no profitable. Probably this planet would be better for smaller ships with landing capability.

There are at least two kinds of interface here. There is the Orbit-to-Ground interface which depends on free shuttle space and traffic control, and there is the ability to transport goods out of the down-port into the rest of the planet.

For example, think of a balkanized world where the richest country can afford to put up a down port that is more than just a slab of dirt. However, it might not be able to move the cargo to another country due to economic or political motivations.

Plus, there is the ability of any market to absorb a given amount of product X. For example, how many tons of prunes could a small country use?

I do believe that the large freighters would have one or two shuttles of their own so they could transport items down to the planet without having to wait for the high-port to be able to do this if necessary. I realize that there is a cost to transporting a shuttle, but during the week in jump, cargo could be moved so that the shuttle is pre-loaded for the next stop.

 

[Dragoner]

This is not unlike the RW in other areas where Banks finance small business and construction projects - knowing full well the failure rates. They 'bank on them' in fact - profiting from the fact that failure rates are predictable.

Yes. Banks create money by lending it, then at the same time charging interest on what they lend.

Though this is beyond the game same as doing DDBD on a free trader.

 

[McPerth]

There are at least two kinds of interface here. There is the Orbit-to-Ground interface which depends on free shuttle space and traffic control, and there is the ability to transport goods out of the down-port into the rest of the planet.

You're right. Of course I meant Orbit-to-ground interface, as for latter transport the starship desn't need to remain in orbit.

For example, think of a balkanized world where the richest country can afford to put up a down port that is more than just a slab of dirt. However, it might not be able to move the cargo to another country due to economic or political motivations.

Plus, there is the ability of any market to absorb a given amount of product X. For example, how many tons of prunes could a small country use?

Agreed again. On the first case, though, the transport once goods are delivered it's not ship's captain problem. The brocker who bought it, either from the same shi's captain if it was speculative cargo or from some outworld source if it was freight, has to care about it, while the ship jumps away to other trips...

About the second case, I guess you hint here that if the port regularly docks such large freighters it's logical to think it has interface (again, orbit-to-surface and vice versa) enough to care for it.

I agree in this as routine mater, but surely there will be instances where some large cargos must be delivered to planets without this interface. As an example, in the AZ Chill (JTAS 7) the planet in question is TL 7, pop 7 and starport B, yet has imported TL 9 locomotives for its trains. Someone had to take those locomotives there, and I guess this planet has few in the way of interface. Same would happen if a relatively backwater planet wants to build any large infrastructure (importing large amounts of cargoes with small interface infrastructure).

Of course, if you're carring cargo/freight to Rhylanor, interface capability is taken as given (and sure there are stores in the highport to take care of any cargo if needed).

I do believe that the large freighters would have one or two shuttles of their own so they could transport items down to the planet without having to wait for the high-port to be able to do this if necessary. I realize that there is a cost to transporting a shuttle, but during the week in jump, cargo could be moved so that the shuttle is pre-loaded for the next stop.

But even a shuttle has only 71 dtons of cargo capacity per trip, and, counting loading/unloading time at each end of the round trip, and other stops, I envision it making 2-3 round trips at most, so with two shuttles as you say, they will take a while to unload the full 10000 dtons of cargo.

When I put in my example about 500 dtons uplift/downlift capacity, my though was about 3 shuttles fully engaged in the opperation.

 

[whartung]

Well there's another 800 lb gorilla that we don't talk about.

Simply, why there is interstellar trade at all.

We can conflate it with international trade. The locomotives are an excellent example.

If the locomotive manufacturer is only a "week or two" away, and where shipping is not the major component to overall cost or delay of delivery, then there's no reason to set up a locomotive industry. At best the manufacturer may set up a local service facility (or the railroad operator will simply contract the service to the manufacturer who sets up on site).

But we don't see much discussion about the costs of local trade. How much does it cost to grow rice in Southeast Asia and ship to the US in contrast to growing rice in Alpha Centuri and shipping it to the US.

It still takes a week or so to get the shipment, whether from SE Asia or Alpha Centuri. Ideally an ocean vessel is cheaper than a star ship. Is it cheaper than space ship? That just flies the rice over using an M-Drive in a couple of hours? Is that reduced travel time worth any extra expense to maintain the space ship? Likely not for a bulk commodity like rice, but who knows.

So, those are dynamics I haven't really seen explored, sine the economic models overall are pretty weak (and since economics modeling is actually pretty complicated).

 

[HG_B]

Well there's another 800 lb gorilla that we don't talk about.

Simply, why there is interstellar trade at all.

Because of differing TL's, planetary conditions & population. Take those and consider macro econ and that is WHY there is interstellar trade.

 

[atpollard]

Simply, why there is interstellar trade at all.

Strictly an IMTU hand wave, but I assume that the minimum population needed to support a specific TL (by support, I mean provide all of the interdependent skills, specialties and wholesale products and services needed for sustainable self-sufficiency) is 10 ^TL.

So IMTU, any world with a TL greater than POP is dependent upon imports to sustain some portion of its tech base. It also means that TL greater than about 10 will generally require (as an absolute necessity) multiple star systems with a completely interdependent economy.

The real world mental image that I use would be a member of the EU attempting to cut off all trade with the EU and go it alone as either fully isolationist or trading exclusively with South America.

 

[Dragoner]

Simply, why there is interstellar trade at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage