Tramp Trader revisited

[Pwyll]

OTU Type A Free Trader has always left a bit to be desired IMO. Traders need a more accessible and supportable alternative for their initial ship purchase. This solution was designed using (mostly) MT.

:::EDIT::: see revised ships several posts down :::

Class: Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
TL: 15
Displacement: 100 tons
Crew: 1
Unit Cost: MCr 21.50707
Cost in Quantity: MCr 17.20566
Jump: 1
Maneuver: 1g
Power: 252Mw
Computer: Model/1
Staterooms: 1 (includes crew)
Passengers: none
Cargo: 67.4221 tons
Fuel: 10.896 tons
Refinery: yes
Agility: 0 (0.0718)
Configuration: streamlined box
Armament: 1 triple missile turret
1 heads-up holodisplay
1 airlock

Design notes:
- no vehicles because cargo space is a priority
- small crew leaves space for cargo
- standard plans, no architect's fees

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 3,441,132 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 255,193 Cr
- Monthly payment = 71,691 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 7,116 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 105.5 Cr
- Monthly maximum freight revenue = 134,000 Cr (assuming holds full of freight)
- Monthly maximum net profit = 55,193 Cr

Evaluation notes:
- securing a mail contract would increase the freight profit margin substantially (136%).
- crew is so small that it makes active passenger transport less secure (too vulnerable to hijacking)
- hunting and scientific expeditions would be hampered by the jump 1 range
- most likely usage involves heavy speculation, with freight to fill up the hold
- economically accessible and supportable. excellent initial ship purchase for many enterprises, but particularly for trading.

=============================

supported variants:
small sleeper (cargo hold replaced with low berths, add medic stateroom)
small speculator (add broker and possibly medic staterooms)
(these after-market conversion kits are readily available and may be installed by shipyard personnel in a week or two.)


custom variants:
small yacht (cargo hold primarily replaced with luxury staterooms and lounge, add stewards and medic staterooms. large baggage compartment and perhaps a vehicle as well)

 

[Shadowdancer]

I like this concept. Sort of the Traveller equivalent of today's independent truckers.

But it would most likely find most of its work in backwater areas and systems off the main trade routes. If I owned one of these and was working in those regions of space, I'd at least like to have one other person on board -- a gunner who could also help move cargo if needed, and patch me up as necessary.

I guess you could double bunk the stateroom. Any idea what effect another stateroom/crew member would have on the economics of operation?

 

[Rupert Boleyn]

Originally posted by Pwyll:
OTU Type A Free Trader has always left a bit to be desired IMO. Traders need a more accessible and supportable alternative for their initial ship purchase. This solution was designed using MT.


Class: Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
TL: 15
Displacement: 100 tons
Crew: 1
Unit Cost: MCr 21.50707
Cost in Quantity: MCr 17.20566
Jump: 1
Maneuver: 1g
Power: 252Mw
Computer: Model/1
Staterooms: 1 (includes crew)
Passengers: none
Cargo: 67.4221 tons
Fuel: 10.896 tons
Refinery: yes
Agility: 0 (0.0718)
Configuration: streamlined box
Armament: 1 triple missile turret
1 heads-up holodisplay
1 airlock

By my calculations this ship only has fuel for 4 days, unless you're running the reactor at a very low level through most of the trip, and IMO that makes any claim to scale efficiency a bit dubious.

I don't see any avionics, which makes the missiles a bit of a waste. Sandcasters might be better, especially as they're defensive and missiles aren't (at all). Also, a spaceship is supposed to have three computers.

As the ship is armed with a turret it should have a gunner, increasing the crew to two, and probably and engineer as well (note that the Scout/Courier with it's single bridge/engineer breaks the rules). Technically all ships should have two bridge crew, BTW (but this is broken in every MT design under 400 Dtons, so wouldn't worry about it). If you stick with this you should note that the single crewman will be horribly overworked, and will probably have a choice between evading and shooting in combat. Also to get a mail contract it must get a actual gunner, leading to very cramped conditions.
[/QB][/QUOTE]

 

[Pwyll]

IMO, part of the appeal of this small freighter is the "stripped-down" nature to maximize its payload. it is armed to comply with mail contracts, which considerably increase profits on such a small ship.
a couple of operational notes...
- bridge crew can operate turret with no penalty
- medic is required on ships that carry passengers
- robot stevedores are cheap, common and take little space
- robots make loyal bodyguards and take little space
- only routine or better quality ports provide competent brokers, so including an expert broker in the crew might increase profit (without increasing crew salaries!) of course, ymmv

Class: Ant
Small Freighter with increased crew breakdowns

============================================

Crew: 2
Unit Cost: MCr 21.90707
Cost in Quantity: MCr 17.52566
Staterooms: 2 (pilot, medic)
Cargo: 63.4221 tons

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 4,381,414 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 276,334 Cr
- Monthly payment = 91,280 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 11,620 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 183.2 Cr
- Monthly maximum freight revenue = 126,000 Cr (assuming holds full of freight)
- Monthly maximum net profit = 23,100 Cr

a good broker might make this work, but a good broker might get a lot more volume by working in a port

============================================

Crew: 3
Unit Cost: MCr 22.30707
Cost in Quantity: MCr 17.84566
Staterooms: 3 (pilot, medic, gunner)
Cargo: 59.4221 tons

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 4,461,414 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 303,200 Cr
- Monthly payment = 92,947 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 16,173 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 272.2 Cr
- Monthly maximum freight revenue = 118,000 Cr (assuming holds full of freight)
- Monthly maximum net profit = 8,880 Cr

not really viable. a bad streak of luck could quickly lead to skipping out.

 

[trader jim]

Great Idea!!!......Kinda like an 18 wheeler!!!!...
it WOULD work in back water lines, or FEEDER LINES,....would like to see SEVERAL DECK PLANS!!!!!......

 

[Pwyll]

In reply to Rupert:

no avionics... not much profit in NOE flight unless you're smuggling, and this is no military ship, so no avionics. what's this about wasted missiles? i don't understand.

crew... i use precedents set by Type S scout. owner-operator could even be broker as well

design flaws... i design using MT, except where there are undesireable discrepancies between it and previous rule-sets, in which case i use HG. the small freighter has three computers, all model/1

i left out a lot of details from these specs. the ship also has basic and extended life support

fuel capacity: jump fuel = 67.5 kl / jump unit and power plant fuel = .009 kl * size in kl of plant / hour. 10 tons of jump fuel (one jump) and .896 tons power plant fuel (hmm at .243 kl / hour that's less than 4 hours. major error in my spread sheet

thanks for pointing that out). tho now that i think about it, i'd gone back to HG for power plant fuel usage instead of this

ridiculously high amount. which means there ought to be 1.0 tons of fuel for the power plant. which means we subtract .104 tons from the cargo hold. fortunately that doesn't change this ship's perfromance noticeably. my lifeboats, however, are going to feel the crunch

mail contracts... thanks for mentioning, MT does specify gunner as well as weaponry and i'd let that slip. these contracts would only go to ships in commercial service, so double-bunking the gunner does not comply. design needs second stateroom as well as weaponry to comply with mail contracts.

====================================================

In reply to Paraquat Johnson and trader jim:

thanks for your enthusiasm

why do you guys feel like this ship would be more viable in backwater areas?

i don't really do deck plans. please, if anyone is interested, i would also like to see them

 

[Rupert Boleyn]

Originally posted by Pwyll:
In reply to Rupert:
no avionics... not much profit in NOE flight unless you're smuggling, and this is no military ship, so no avionics. what's this about wasted missiles? i don't understand.

Without some sort of sensors, such as an Active or Passive EMS system, your ship won't be able to detect an opponent, and therefore won't be able to fire on it. I'd go with an Interplanetary range Passive EMS system - they're small and don’t use much power.

crew... i use precedents set by Type S scout. owner-operator could even be broker as well

Fair enough, though I do think you should have an extra gunner.

design flaws... i design using MT, except where there are undesireable discrepancies between it and previous rule-sets, in which case i use HG. the small freighter has three computers, all model/1

i left out a lot of details from these specs. the ship also has basic and extended life support

Ah. Okay, though I'd leave them in - that way you don't get the likes of me saying they've been left out. BTW, I don't think you need basic and extended life-support.

fuel capacity: jump fuel = 67.5 kl / jump unit and power plant fuel = .009 kl * size in kl of plant / hour. 10 tons of jump fuel (one jump) and .896 tons power plant fuel (hmm at .243 kl / hour that's less than 4 hours. major error in my spread sheet

thanks for pointing that out). tho now that i think about it, i'd gone back to HG for power plant fuel usage instead of this

ridiculously high amount. which means there ought to be 1.0 tons of fuel for the power plant. which means we subtract .104 tons from the cargo hold. fortunately that doesn't change this ship's perfromance noticeably. my lifeboats, however, are going to feel the crunch

I agree with you on MT's horrible fuel consumption stats. It's one (of many) reasons I prefer to design using FF&S1 or HG2 (depending on the rules set its for).

mail contracts... thanks for mentioning, MT does specify gunner as well as weaponry and i'd let that slip. these contracts would only go to ships in commercial service, so double-bunking the gunner is not acceptable. design needs second stateroom as well as weaponry to comply with mail contracts.

Thinking about it, I'd go for a double turret with one missile launcher and one sandcaster - that means you're armed and have some sort of defence. I was going to suggest a triple turret with missile, sandcaster, and pulse laser. Power the laser with a battery - 3 Dtons will power the laser for 68 minutes, which is a bit over three combat rounds. However TL15 batteries cost 10MCr per kilolitre - an absurd price, IMO (TNE/FF&S batteries cost MCr0.005 per kilolitre, though they're somewhat less energy dense).

why do you guys feel like this ship would be more viable in backwater areas?

Probably because it won't be competing with 10,000+ DTon mega-freighters and LASH systems.

 

[Pwyll]

OK, here are the revised ships

IIRC it was Whipsnade who used a term for it that i like, "mini-trader"
thanks to everyone who provided input

=============================================
Class: Biting Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
TL: 15
Displacement: 100 tons
Crew: 2 (pilot, gunner)
Standard Design Cost: MCr 19.75365
Jump: 1
Maneuver: 1g
Power: 252Mw
Computer: Model/1 x 3
Sensors: standard EMS arrays, active (far orbit) and passive (interstellar)
Staterooms: 2
Passengers: none
Cargo: 63.34 tons
Fuel: 11.04 tons
Refinery: yes
Agility: 0
Configuration: streamlined box
Armament: 1 triple missile turret
2 heads-up holodisplays

Design notes:
- standard plans, no architect's fees. price includes 90% discount for standard design
- mainly MT rule-set, crew like CT Type S Scout, fuel usage from HG
- armed to accomodate mail contracts and subsidies

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 3,950,730 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 311,865 Cr
- Monthly payment = 82,307 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 11,699 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 184.7 Cr
- Monthly maximum freight and mail revenue = 141,000 Cr (assuming 5 ton mail contract and remaining hold filled up with freight)
- Monthly maximum freight and mail net profit = 46,994 Cr

===========================================
Class: Worker Ant
Type: Unarmed Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
TL: 15
Displacement: 100 tons
Crew: 1 (pilot)
Standard Design Cost: MCr 17.31195
Jump: 1
Maneuver: 1g
Power: 252Mw
Computer: Model/1 x 3
Sensors: standard EMS arrays, active (far orbit) and passive (interstellar)
Staterooms: 1
Passengers: none
Cargo: 68.33 tons
Fuel: 11.04 tons
Refinery: yes
Agility: 0
Configuration: streamlined box
Armament: none
1 heads-up holodisplay

Design notes:
- standard plans, no architect's fees. price includes 90% discount for standard design
- fuel usage from HG, crew like a Type S Scout, but otherwise MT rule-set
- designed for small-scale speculation in patrolled areas

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 3,462,390 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 253,350 Cr
- Monthly payment = 72,134 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 7,125 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 104.3 Cr
- Monthly maximum freight revenue = 136,000 Cr (assuming hold filled up with freight)
- Monthly maximum freight net profit = 56,741 Cr

 

[Pwyll]

i mentioned a variant earlier, a "sleeper" class... here it is

this type of ship might be subsidized by planetary government, or could even be a viable private enterprise.
===================================
Class: Sleeper Ant
Type: Unarmed Small Low Passage Slow Liner
Architect: Pwyll
TL: 15
Displacement: 100 tons
Crew: 3 (pilot, medic, gunner)
Standard Design Cost: MCr 17.31195
Jump: 1
Maneuver: 1g
Power: 252Mw
Computer: Model/1 x 3
Sensors: standard EMS arrays, active (far orbit) and passive (interstellar)
Staterooms: 3
Low Passengers: 39
Cargo: 7.37 tons
Fuel: 21.04 tons
Refinery: yes
Agility: 0
Configuration: streamlined box
Armament: 1 triple missile turret
2 heads-up holodisplays

Design notes:
- standard plans, no architect's fees. price includes 90% discount for standard design
- fuel usage from HG, crew like a Type S Scout, but otherwise MT rule-set
- designed for small-scale transportation of indigents, prisoners or economically-challenged travellers, and to accommodate mail contracts
- fuel capacity for two consecutive jumps

Evaluation:
- Downpayment: 4,391,955 Cr
- Ship price per ton of payload = 473,503 Cr
- Monthly payment = 72,134 Cr (assuming standard financing)
- Monthly operating cost = 18,220 Cr (assuming 2 jumps, standard salaries, and maintenance fund)
- Monthly operating cost per ton of cargo = 392.9 Cr
- Monthly maximum combined revenue = 132,000 Cr (assuming 39 low passages for 78KCr, 5 ton mail contract for 50KCr and hold filled up with freight for 4KCr)
- Monthly maximum combined net profit = 41,646 Cr

 

[Shadowdancer]

I think the Biting Ant would do better in backwater areas because it has less competition from the big shipping companies. More chance of finding cargo, both bulk rate and speculative. Also gives you a better chance of getting a mail contract -- that's primarily where they are needed. The X-boats and the big shipping companies carry most of the mail on the main routes.

The Worker Ant would be good for, as you said, well patrolled regions of space. Also could be used in one well-populated and settled system moving cargo from one planet to another, or hauling supplies to remote mining outposts, research facilities, etc. Of course, then you wouldn't need the jump drive unless it was more economical to jump from point to point within the system rather than use manuever drives the whole way.

I think you could make this work with just two crew members if they have the right spread of skills. One with piloting/astrogation skills, and probably the merchant skills, the second with gunner and engineering skills. They both need some medical training, so they can patch each other up. An ex-Scout and an ex-Merchant could make it work easy. Or an ex-Belter. Or an ex-Navy. Maybe an ex-Marine.

 

[Pwyll]

the rule-sets i possess completely fail to account for the type of competitive environment we are discussing. long have i been interested in simulating it within the game... any suggestions?

one method that comes to mind is to assume that the weekly totals of passengers and freight and cargo lots (per trade and commerce section) must be split between all potential buyers in port that week.
BUT it would seem unbelieveable to me that a hipop, industrial economy would produce mere hundreds of tons of exports per week. IMO, only corporations and governments would have the financial clout to make purchases, so the cost of goods would be much higher than the values the trade and commerce rules use, substantially reducing profit percentage. doesn't quite seem to fit the system.

the trade and commerce rules as i have them allow a trader to become wealthy quickly with little risk and little skill. for instance, consider a speculation route like Collace and Tarsus in Plankwell/d268. a character with no initial trading skills, no ship, and capital approx 30KCr+ might become a millionaire in a few months by trading between those two worlds. seems like LOTS of people would be doing this

 

[Shadowdancer]

Do you have the T20 rules? In it, there is more randomness to the available speculative cargos, and the number of available lots, partially based on the starport size and other economic factors. It makes it more difficult to set up one of those maxed-out-modifier trade routes like the one you mentioned. The same types of cargos are not always available in a system each time you visit.

But still, a merchant character with good trading skills can get rich real fast. I had an NPC character clear more than 1 million in profit in one month.

 

[The Oz]

Originally posted by Pwyll:
the rule-sets i possess completely fail to account for the type of competitive environment we are discussing. long have i been interested in simulating it within the game... any suggestions?

One of the things I've liked about GT is their merchant supplement FAR TRADER. While it can be a little hard to understand, they have lots of good ideas and concepts.

one method that comes to mind is to assume that the weekly totals of passengers and freight and cargo lots (per trade and commerce section) must be split between all potential buyers in port that week.
BUT it would seem unbelieveable to me that a hipop, industrial economy would produce mere hundreds of tons of exports per week. IMO, only corporations and governments would have the financial clout to make purchases, so the cost of goods would be much higher than the values the trade and commerce rules use, substantially reducing profit percentage. doesn't quite seem to fit the system.

As I always thought of it, and GT also seems to think of it, the CT trade system was intended to show the "leftovers," the freight and passengers available for the small trader vessels after the big shipping megacorps had taken the bulk of the trade.

the trade and commerce rules as i have them allow a trader to become wealthy quickly with little risk and little skill. for instance, consider a speculation route like Collace and Tarsus in Plankwell/d268. a character with no initial trading skills, no ship, and capital approx 30KCr+ might become a millionaire in a few months by trading between those two worlds. seems like LOTS of people would be doing this

And that's why GT:FT says it isn't so profitable after all. Routes like that get lots of people trying to cash in (it's the TRAVELLER equivalent of a "gold rush" and everyone wants their share) and those people should wind up competing against each other. The end result is a leveling of prices within local trading zones. If players want to make a killing with one cargo, they should have to make quite a trip: say, bringing a cargo of TL15 electronics from Rhylanor all the way to the Five Sisters subsector. That way their cargo will be much more rare and the problem they're likely to face is that no one out there might need enough of what they're selling to buy enough of it to make the trip profitable. But then, those are the risks of speculative trade.

I never allowed the trade and commerce rules to run/ruin my game: I freely (if secretly) manipulated results to make sure my players didn't get any wealthier than the scenario/campaign called for. At the time I didn't understand the economics either; I just knew that allowing my PCs to have access to untold millions was a bad idea.

 

[Rupert Boleyn]

Originally posted by Pwyll:
OK, here are the revised ships

I like 'em. Have you considered trying for some TL12 versions? One thing I never really liked about MT was that most of the published ships were TL15. That's fine for people with plenty of cash, or who're operating on major route or in the core, but for people out in the backwaters of the Marches, Daibei, or Diaspora a TL15 ship could be a real pain to get parts for (or at least inconvenient, requiring long journeys in directions you'd rather not go).

 

[Rupert Boleyn]

Originally posted by Pwyll:
the rule-sets i possess completely fail to account for the type of competitive environment we are discussing. long have i been interested in simulating it within the game... any suggestions?

Have you tried GURPS: Traveller's First In? It's rules are much more realistic than any previous ones (though they do require a bit of setup before the game to use them to their best effect).

 

[Whipsnade]

Pwyll wrote:

"the rule-sets i possess completely fail to account for the type of competitive environment we are discussing. long have i been interested in simulating it within the game... any suggestions?"


Pwyll,

GT:Far Trader or T20 is your best bet. Ditch the economic models found in LBB:2 Starships and LBB:8 Merchant Prince as soon as possible. They were laughable even when they were published.

"BUT it would seem unbelieveable to me that a hipop, industrial economy would produce mere hundreds of tons of exports per week. IMO, only corporations and governments would have the financial clout to make purchases, so the cost of goods would be much higher than the values the trade and commerce rules use, substantially reducing profit percentage. doesn't quite seem to fit the system."

Congratulations, you've just independently re-discovered the glaring flaws in LBB:2 and LBB:8. The passengers and cargos listed in the tables are what is 'left over' once the big boys fill their plates.

"the trade and commerce rules as i have them allow a trader to become wealthy quickly with little risk and little skill."

Which is why they're considered broken.

"for instance, consider a speculation route like Collace and Tarsus in Plankwell/d268. a character with no initial trading skills, no ship, and capital approx 30KCr+ might become a millionaire in a few months by trading between those two worlds. seems like LOTS of people would be doing this."

Lots of people would be, would end up in competition with each other, and would drive any profits to be had down. The various LBB:2 and LBB:8 sanctioned "Santa Claus" trade routes that you describe cannot last for very long, maybe a run or two, before they collapse due to overcapacity on the run.

Get T20 or GT:FT, you're merchant campaigns will be the better for it.


Sincerely,
Larsen

 

[Rupert Boleyn]

Originally posted by Larsen E. Whipsnade:

Lots of people would be, would end up in competition with each other, and would drive any profits to be had down. The various LBB:2 and LBB:8 sanctioned "Santa Claus" trade routes that you describe cannot last for very long, maybe a run or two, before they collapse due to overcapacity on the run.

I found while running a Traveller game last year that the LBB2 rules, as written aren't quite as bad as many people think. The requirement to roll what you can obtain randomly, and only once a week, cuts down on some of the abuse. It's all good when you arrive at the hi-pop industrial end of the line and find a batch cybernetics for sale, but it's not so good when you find nothing but 200 DTons of grain that no one wants.

The LBB8/MT system (also used in TNE to my great irritation), OTOH, is wonderfully deterministic and easy to make a killing in.

 

[Pwyll]

rupert, oz, whipsnade and paraquat, thanks for the suggestions on trav materials

and thanks to all for your inputs

 

[Pwyll]

here are some TL 9 versions of the ant
=============================================
Ship: Worker Ant
Class: Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
Tech Level: 9

USP
SF-1611111-000000-00000-0 MCr 31.138 100 Tons
Bat Bear Crew: 1
Bat TL: 9

Cargo: 48.000 Fuel: 11.000 EP: 1.000 Agility: 1
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification

Architects Fee: MCr 0.311 Cost in Quantity: MCr 24.910


Detailed Description

HULL
100.000 tons standard, 1,400.000 cubic meters, Flattened Sphere Configuration

CREW
Pilot

ENGINEERING
Jump-1, 1G Manuever, Power plant-1, 1.000 EP, Agility 1

AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/1 Computer

HARDPOINTS
None

ARMAMENT
None

DEFENCES
None

CRAFT
None

FUEL
11.000 Tons Fuel (1 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant

MISCELLANEOUS
1.0 Stateroom, 48.000 Tons Cargo

USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
None

COST
MCr 31.449 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 0.311), MCr 24.910 in Quantity

CONSTRUCTION TIME
38 Weeks Singly, 30 Weeks in Quantity

COMMENTS
-----------------------------------------------
Ship: Pissant
Class: Biting Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
Tech Level: 9

USP
SF-1611111-000000-00002-0 MCr 33.888 100 Tons
Bat Bear 1 Crew: 2
Bat 1 TL: 9

Cargo: 43.000 Fuel: 11.000 EP: 1.000 Agility: 1
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification

Architects Fee: MCr 0.339 Cost in Quantity: MCr 27.110


Detailed Description

HULL
100.000 tons standard, 1,400.000 cubic meters, Flattened Sphere Configuration

CREW
Pilot, Gunner

ENGINEERING
Jump-1, 1G Manuever, Power plant-1, 1.000 EP, Agility 1

AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/1 Computer

HARDPOINTS
1 Hardpoint

ARMAMENT
1 Triple Missile Turret organised into 1 Battery (Factor-2)

DEFENCES
None

CRAFT
None

FUEL
11.000 Tons Fuel (1 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant

MISCELLANEOUS
2.0 Staterooms, 43.000 Tons Cargo

USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
None

COST
MCr 34.227 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 0.339), MCr 27.110 in Quantity

CONSTRUCTION TIME
38 Weeks Singly, 30 Weeks in Quantity

COMMENTS
-----------------------------------------------
Ship: Snow Ant
Class: Sleeping Ant
Type: Small Freighter
Architect: Pwyll
Tech Level: 9

USP
SF-1611111-000000-00002-0 MCr 36.188 100 Tons
Bat Bear 1 Crew: 3
Bat 1 TL: 9

Cargo: 33.000 Low: 12 Fuel: 11.000 EP: 1.000 Agility: 1
Fuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification

Architects Fee: MCr 0.362 Cost in Quantity: MCr 28.950


Detailed Description

HULL
100.000 tons standard, 1,400.000 cubic meters, Flattened Sphere Configuration

CREW
Pilot, Medic, Gunner

ENGINEERING
Jump-1, 1G Manuever, Power plant-1, 1.000 EP, Agility 1

AVIONICS
Bridge, Model/1 Computer

HARDPOINTS
1 Hardpoint

ARMAMENT
1 Triple Missile Turret organised into 1 Battery (Factor-2)

DEFENCES
None

CRAFT
None

FUEL
11.000 Tons Fuel (1 parsecs jump and 28 days endurance)
On Board Fuel Scoops, On Board Fuel Purification Plant

MISCELLANEOUS
3.0 Staterooms, 12 Low Berths, 12 Low Passengers, 33.000 Tons Cargo

USER DEFINED COMPONENTS
None

COST
MCr 36.550 Singly (incl. Architects fees of MCr 0.362), MCr 28.950 in Quantity

CONSTRUCTION TIME
38 Weeks Singly, 30 Weeks in Quantity

COMMENTS