phavoc wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:52 pm
BigDogsRunning wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:45 am
I agree with you on the first part, putting stations close to the planet creates numerous efficiencies.
It seems like putting facilities at the 100D point wouldn't solve that problem, unless you put a bunch of them out there. If you come in on the other side of the 100D orbit, you now have to travel twice as far to reach the facility. And now transferring cargo to the planet is significantly more expensive, as is bringing fuel up from the planet to sell to the docked ships. Obviously if you're harvesting from a gas giant for fuel to sell, there is no increase in cost, but no real decrease either.
Given that you don't necessarily know where in the 100D orbit ships will be coming in, it might be useful to put them at 80D or so, instead of right at 100D. For the earth that would work out to about 2.5 times the moon's orbit.
Shouldn't be difficult, as that's what your navigational charts are for. You would know where a planet and it's major hub stations where before you jumped to another system. Yod simply plot your arrivaluable accordingly.
Stations at the outer edge are there to speed transit times for the jump ships as that appears to be the higher cost. And if the system is part of a hub and spoke system then you are still saving money because some passengers and cargoes are just stopping over in the system on their way elsewhere.
OK, but, if the charts are that detailed, and the calculations that simple, why don't ships regularly accelerate out to 100D, Jump into position such that they reserve their momentum and merely decelerate at the destination. This seems like it would shave time. Since you already have to account for changing vectors based on orbital position of your target world, differences in relative velocities of departure and destination systems. There is an assumption of super precise navigational data, exquisitely precise instruments to determine your departure position. Not to mention allowing for traffic at destination systems, especially busy ones. If everyone can jump in with pinpoint precision, why not just save the cost of maneuver drives and have tugs available to grab ships as they come out of jump right on target?
If everyone was operating at TL15, I can see it, but you've got shipping that is barely jump capable, really primitive systems to begin with, and no ability to control for sensor miscalibration. I just think they would build more tolerance into the system to reduce risk. I'm surprised that as a default, incoming jump points aren't located above or below the ecliptic, to reduce the chance of someone jumping in with a lot of delta-v, in front of, and moving toward an inhabited world. It doesn't take much in the way of relative velocity to make a very large crater with a 200dton freighter. That would also prevent things like interference from the gravity well of satellites, and give you a clear approach toward whichever orbital or surface destination that you choose.
I only point out the relative velocity issue because a big deal is made of it in the psionics rules for teleportation. I'm not suggesting that they are one and the same, just that some effort has been made somewhere to address velocity/energy issues.
Other related questions include things like, is the time variation of Jump objective, or subjective. If its objective, then you have a lot more slop in where you are emerging from Jumpspace. Our sun is moving at roughly 777313km/hr, or 18.6million km/day. At one end of the 10% variation in jump time, the Sun, and all of its bodies have moved about 13.6 million km, or, about 1100 diameters, which distance you'll have to make up.