Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:00 pm

IanBruntlett wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:17 pm
Thanks to everyone for their feedback. I've been running a few numbers and they aren't as dire as I first feared.

I do have an additional question. Passengers. They want space for their belongings. Namely
High : One ton
Middle : 100Kg
Basic : 10Kg
Low : 10Kg

Now the ships cargo hold in this case is 82 dtons (Free Trader) in volume. Is there any simple rule-of-thumb to convert the desired cargo space in Kg (weight) into dtons (volume)?

Thanks!
ship cabin is like a hotel room. bags in there with you in the wardrobe. got to wear something different each day for 10 days, right? 10 pair shoes, 10 party dresses, 10 casual outfits, 10 handbags ...

only need cargo hold if you are emigrating or travelling with heavy equipment.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:42 pm

Moppy wrote: ship cabin is like a hotel room. bags in there with you in the wardrobe. got to wear something different each day for 10 days, right? 10 pair shoes, 10 party dresses, 10 casual outfits, 10 handbags ...
1 tonne for a high passenger is something like 40 suitcases. No way that fits in a tiny little stateroom.

I like to set aside a Dt or two for excess baggage in small ships.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7370
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Condottiere » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:35 am

1. Annual maintenance should be professionally done, in a well equipped garage; you might want to be sure that the operator owes you a couple of favours.

2. I tend to schlep along as much luggage as the airline allows me to get away with, which up to now has included a personal computer and a lot of electronics; clothes you can buy anywhere, and cheap cellulose based disposable ones should be common in the future. There are reasons to bring along your own equipment, and paying a thousand bucks per additional fourteen cubic metres over volume probably is very reasonable; just pack it securely. Thank god we've moved on to NVMEs.

3. Recalling Dracula, you could always charter a starship, and pack it to the brim with coffins, supervised by a hand picked team of medical professionals.
Linwood
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 518
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:41 am

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Linwood » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:55 am

And no UV lighting.... :D
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:16 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:42 pm
Moppy wrote: ship cabin is like a hotel room. bags in there with you in the wardrobe. got to wear something different each day for 10 days, right? 10 pair shoes, 10 party dresses, 10 casual outfits, 10 handbags ...
1 tonne for a high passenger is something like 40 suitcases. No way that fits in a tiny little stateroom.

I like to set aside a Dt or two for excess baggage in small ships.
Given that Travelelr has magic toilets, I don't have a problem with 1/4 of a stateroom compring a walk-in closet with a dressing area, and it matches some contemporary desgins.

You can certainly allocate cargo hold space if you want to.

Note that we're discussing volume and not floor area, and don't have to care about stacking because of our rmagic cargo abstraction. So 40 suitcases is really only 3-4 stacks of 10-14 if you stack floor to ceiling in the 3 meter high cabin. The floor area for 3-4 suitcases laying down isn't much.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:50 pm

Moppy wrote: Given that Travelelr has magic toilets, ...
Where does magic toilets come from?

Moppy wrote: ... I don't have a problem with 1/4 of a stateroom compring a walk-in closet with a dressing area, and it matches some contemporary desgins.
So in a 9-13 m² cabin, we should waste 2-3 m² on storing suitcases? If we allow space for a person in that closet too, that is basically half the cabin. I would say it's cramped enough without that.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:59 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:50 pm
Moppy wrote: ... I don't have a problem with 1/4 of a stateroom compring a walk-in closet with a dressing area, and it matches some contemporary desgins.
So in a 9-13 m² cabin, we should waste 2-3 m² on storing suitcases? If we allow space for a person in that closet too, that is basically half the cabin. I would say it's cramped enough without that.

Where does magic toilets come from?
Firstly you don't need to allocate the full 1 dton of cargo per high passenger exclusively to cargo or stateroom. But people today tend to think of commercial planes instead.

Secondly, Mongoose 2 staterooms are supposed to be 4 dtons or 56 m3. High passage would not be sharing. Corridors can come from there, or they can come from the additional optional communal space allocated at design time.

Also aren't ceilings 3 meters high? So even if it's 6 squares on a plan, you have 50cm of overhead or under-floor in each square and still have 2.5m to stand in.

Thirdly, luggage space isn't "wasted". It's up to the passenger how it's used. The walk in closest doesn't need to have a physical door because "tech" and that space doesn't need to be permanently allocated. For example it might just be a roll out cloth thing that hardens, and you can push a button to reconfigure where it slides.

Finally the magic toilets come from the fact that Mongoose's adventure class ships mostly don't appear to have day heads, and "tech" can reconfigure spaces similar to the curtain above.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:52 pm

Moppy wrote: Secondly, Mongoose 2 staterooms are supposed to be 4 dtons or 56 m3. High passage would not be sharing. Corridors can come from there, or they can come from the additional optional communal space allocated at design time.
Yes, staterooms are default 4 Dt (5 Dt including extra common areas), including corridors, galleys, lounges, etc. Your individual cabin is often 4-6 squares (9-13.5 m²).

Moppy wrote: Also aren't ceilings 3 meters high? So even if it's 6 squares on a plan, you have 50cm of overhead or under-floor in each square and still have 2.5m to stand in.
Quite, but there is generally where e.g. life support equipment and water, sewage, fuel, and power lines are located. The inter-deck space is not generally available.

Moppy wrote: Thirdly, luggage space isn't "wasted". It's up to the passenger how it's used. The walk in closest doesn't need to have a physical door because "tech" and that space doesn't need to be permanently allocated.
Still, 40 suitcases in a small cabin is quite a lot...

Moppy wrote: Finally the magic toilets come from the fact that Mongoose's adventure class ships mostly don't appear to have day heads, ...
Few deckplans are detailed enough to show every fresher, storage closet, or bog roll.

On small ship you are very rarely more than 20 m away from your stateroom. Do you really need heads every 5 m?

Moppy wrote: ... and "tech" can reconfigure spaces similar to the curtain above.
And where is that specified, or is it just something you invented?
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:01 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:52 pm
Moppy wrote: Finally the magic toilets come from the fact that Mongoose's adventure class ships mostly don't appear to have day heads, ...
Few deckplans are detailed enough to show every fresher, storage closet, or bog roll.

On small ship you are very rarely more than 20 m away from your stateroom. Do you really need heads every 5 m?
Moppy wrote: ... and "tech" can reconfigure spaces similar to the curtain above.
And where is that specified, or is it just something you invented?
Most crew will be dual-occupancy. Maybe your room mate is asleep or needs private time? Perhaps tech can solve this problem. If not, you need day heads for morale reasons.

We can build folding baths today, so it's certainly possible for them. Today, all you really need to have "fixed" is the plumbing. The bath can "accordion" out from the wall when it needs to.

High passengers probably wouldn't tolerate moving their stuff everytime but they could use that space if they wanted to.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:47 pm

Moppy wrote: Most crew will be dual-occupancy.
Commercial standard is, and has always been, single occupancy:
HG, p21 wrote:Most ships will allocate one person to each stateroom.
Double occupancy can just as well mean two smaller cabins, together the size and cost of a stateroom. Or multi-person bunk rooms with larger common areas. Or a K'kree-style open space including all crew accommodation.

A "stateroom" is not a room, it's the standardised space for all crew quarters and life support. The available space is divided into rooms by the deck plan designer as he sees fit.

Moppy wrote: We can build folding baths today, so it's certainly possible for them. Today, all you really need to have "fixed" is the plumbing. The bath can "accordion" out from the wall when it needs to.
Perhaps we could, but we generally don't, even in small hotel-rooms and ship's cabins.

Foldable "accordion" walls are rarely especially waterproof.


As far as I can see you are calling Traveller heads magic, since you imagine them to be magic. All I see in Traveller is that heads are rarely mentioned, but assumed to exist.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:04 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:47 pm
Moppy wrote: Most crew will be dual-occupancy.
Commercial standard is, and has always been, single occupancy:
HG, p21 wrote:Most ships will allocate one person to each stateroom.
Double occupancy can just as well mean two smaller cabins, together the size and cost of a stateroom. Or multi-person bunk rooms with larger common areas. Or a K'kree-style open space including all crew accommodation.

A "stateroom" is not a room, it's the standardised space for all crew quarters and life support. The available space is divided into rooms by the deck plan designer as he sees fit.
This isn't consistent with how life support costs work. Cr1,000 per stateroom basic cost, and 1,000 per passenger on top. (Cr 2K single, 3K dual). It's also inconsistent with how the deckplans are drawn.

I think with the exception of the Type-S, the core ships have always had, and need, dual occupancy if fully staffed. It's also reflected in the deck plans. The free trader in particular has separate crew and passenger deck and it can be seen that the crew must be using dual to fit on that deck. They could use unused passenger staterooms if the operator wishes to pay the Cr 1000 surcharge for each stateroom. I suspect adventurers will.
AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:47 pm
Moppy wrote: We can build folding baths today, so it's certainly possible for them. Today, all you really need to have "fixed" is the plumbing. The bath can "accordion" out from the wall when it needs to.
Perhaps we could, but we generally don't, even in small hotel-rooms and ship's cabins.

Foldable "accordion" walls are rarely especially waterproof.

As far as I can see you are calling Traveller heads magic, since you imagine them to be magic. All I see in Traveller is that heads are rarely mentioned, but assumed to exist.
Day heads are magic in that if they exist they aren't on most deckplans. It's possible they really don't exist. Cabins are certainly drawn with full bathrooms.

What we can build today has no real reflection on what they will build in at TL 9+ except to show that it would be possible.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:45 pm

Moppy wrote: This isn't consistent with how life support costs work. Cr1,000 per stateroom basic cost, and 1,000 per passenger on top. (Cr 2K single, 3K dual). It's also inconsistent with how the deckplans are drawn.
I don't see the inconsistency?

Many ships are drawn with standard cabins, but some are not. See e.g. CT A1 Kinunir.

Moppy wrote: I think with the exception of the Type-S, the core ships have always had, and need, dual occupancy if fully staffed. It's also reflected in the deck plans.
Let's see, CT S7 has two commercial deck-plans; Subbie and 'Marava' Far Trader:
The Subbie has six crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Enough!
The Marava has three crew staterooms for a standard crew of three. Enough!
The Safari Ship has four staterooms for a standard crew of four. Enough!
The Liner has ten crew staterooms for a standard crew of nine. Enough!

The standard designs in LBB2 certainly has enough staterooms and the rules say:
A non-military starship must have one stateroom for each member of the crew.
MgT2 HG:
The Marava has four crew staterooms for a standard crew of four. Enough!
The Beowulf has three crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Bad! Two crew have to live on the passenger deck.
The Subbie has five crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Enough!

The rules say:
Most ships will allocate one person to each stateroom.
Double Occupancy
Some ships have bunks in their staterooms rather than single beds, allowing two people to share the same stateroom. This is called double occupancy and is often done on exploratory ships, privately-owned vessels and, especially, military ships.

I'm sure we can find some deck-plans that require dual occupancy, but I can see any support for the need for standard commercial dual occupancy.

Moppy wrote: The free trader in particular has separate crew and passenger deck
Source? I'm too lazy to look for it.

If you mean the Marava the deck-plan designer did take a short-cut: "Crew: Three. Pilot/Navigator, Engineer, Steward/Medic." Combining Steward and Medic isn't especially unreasonable and no Navigator is necessary for a 200 Dt ship.

Moppy wrote: Day heads are magic in that if they exist they aren't on most deckplans. It's possible they really don't exist. Cabins are certainly drawn with full bathrooms.
Quite, just as magic as linen-closets, food storage, and laundry rooms.

I would call it mundane.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Tue Oct 01, 2019 2:08 am

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:45 pm
Moppy wrote: This isn't consistent with how life support costs work. Cr1,000 per stateroom basic cost, and 1,000 per passenger on top. (Cr 2K single, 3K dual). It's also inconsistent with how the deckplans are drawn.
I don't see the inconsistency?

Many ships are drawn with standard cabins, but some are not. See e.g. CT A1 Kinunir.
I don't understand how you read the rules differently given Mongoose's definition of a stateroom and how many beds they contain (one for single, one bunk for dual).

Kinunir has barracks in Mongoose. Classic one is a bit non-compliant, that is true.

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:45 pm
Moppy wrote: I think with the exception of the Type-S, the core ships have always had, and need, dual occupancy if fully staffed. It's also reflected in the deck plans.
Let's see, CT S7 has two commercial deck-plans; Subbie and 'Marava' Far Trader:
The Subbie has six crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Enough!
The Marava has three crew staterooms for a standard crew of three. Enough!
The Safari Ship has four staterooms for a standard crew of four. Enough!
The Liner has ten crew staterooms for a standard crew of nine. Enough!

The standard designs in LBB2 certainly has enough staterooms and the rules say:
A non-military starship must have one stateroom for each member of the crew.
MgT2 HG:
The Marava has four crew staterooms for a standard crew of four. Enough!
The Beowulf has three crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Bad! Two crew have to live on the passenger deck.
The Subbie has five crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Enough!

The rules say:
Most ships will allocate one person to each stateroom.
Double Occupancy
Some ships have bunks in their staterooms rather than single beds, allowing two people to share the same stateroom. This is called double occupancy and is often done on exploratory ships, privately-owned vessels and, especially, military ships.
So as I said, this is inconsistent with a full crew. Gunners, stewards etc.

Plus some of those numbers aren't quite right. Mongoose Marava (Far Trader), Safari and Free Trader all have the same crew (5: pilot, astro, engi, medic and steward). Far Trader Marava has the same layout as Free Trader Beowulf in Mongoose (3 crew staterooms). It's the same hull, with jump fuel replacing the cargo. Free Trader, Far Trader are therefore all using dual occupancy without gunners. I don't understand the Mongoose Safari plans (can't distinguish cabin types).

Anyway as said, those ships can use single occupancy if they don't have full passenger complement, assuming passengers don't mind the engineer clumping toolboxes thru the lounge and the operator pays to activate the extra staterooms.
AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:45 pm
I'm sure we can find some deck-plans that require dual occupancy, but I can see any support for the need for standard commercial dual occupancy.
Moppy wrote: The free trader in particular has separate crew and passenger deck
Source? I'm too lazy to look for it.

If you mean the Marava the deck-plan designer did take a short-cut: "Crew: Three. Pilot/Navigator, Engineer, Steward/Medic." Combining Steward and Medic isn't especially unreasonable and no Navigator is necessary for a 200 Dt ship.
I mean you referenced the passenger/crew deck separation above, so whatever.

Commercially combining steward and medic is extremely unviable. Steward is the guy behind the bar. It would be hard to find an actual medical doctor that did that job on the side, and harder for a passenger to trust that doctor. Although it would make a good sit-com show.
AnotherDilbert wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:45 pm
Moppy wrote: Day heads are magic in that if they exist they aren't on most deckplans. It's possible they really don't exist. Cabins are certainly drawn with full bathrooms.
Quite, just as magic as linen-closets, food storage, and laundry rooms.

I would call it mundane.
That's reasonable to consider it mundane if you wish. Or perhaps it really isn't needed due to "tech". This is probably one of the few things we agree on.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7370
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Condottiere » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:30 am

Four tonnes is a yardstick, and metaphorically represented.

Meta four tonnes distributed around the spaceship.

As regards to the luggage, you can always squeeze the suitcases beneath the bed.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:42 am

Moppy wrote: I don't understand how you read the rules differently given Mongoose's definition of a stateroom and how many beds they contain (one for single, one bunk for dual).
There is no such exact definition. E.g.:
Staterooms will be shared (typically four people to a stateroom in bunks) ...

Moppy wrote: Kinunir has barracks in Mongoose. Classic one is a bit non-compliant, that is true.
CT Kinunir is perfectly compliant, just as the X-Boat Tender, Marava, Safari ship, and Yacht are. Some cabins are larger, some are smaller. Some cabins sleeps one, some sleeps many.

The K'kree do not partition crew accommodation or workspaces at all, basically the entire ship is a single large room, which is also perfectly compliant with the rules.

Deck plans are made by the deck plan designer freely, subject to cultural preference.

Moppy wrote:
AnotherDilbert wrote: MgT2 HG:
The Marava has four crew staterooms for a standard crew of four. Enough!
The Beowulf has three crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Bad! Two crew have to live on the passenger deck.
The Subbie has five crew staterooms for a standard crew of five. Enough!
So as I said, this is inconsistent with a full crew. Gunners, stewards etc.
Stewards are included, optional gunners are not included. Most of the ships are unarmed, so don't carry gunners.

There is certainly staterooms enough for full and extended crews, just decrease the passenger count.

Moppy wrote: Plus some of those numbers aren't quite right.
They come straight out of the ship presentations in HG.

Moppy wrote: Anyway as said, those ships can use single occupancy if they don't have full passenger complement, ...
That is what the rules default. Extra crew decrease passenger space. No dual occupancy for crew required or implied.

Moppy wrote: Commercially combining steward and medic is extremely unviable. Steward is the guy behind the bar. It would be hard to find an actual medical doctor that did that job on the side, and harder for a passenger to trust that doctor.
We require a Medic, not a M.D. or a R.N.
A single Medic can handle about 120 people, so will not have even close to a full time job on a small ship.
The rules even makes this an example of combining jobs:
For example, it is very common on a smaller ship for the pilot to also act as the astrogator, or a steward to have basic medical skills.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:45 am

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:42 am
I think we have different rulebooks. My Mongoose HG very clearly says 5 crew for Free Trader, Far Trader and Safari ships. Marava is 6.

We should propbably sort this out this before continuing to discuss the content.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:59 am

Moppy wrote: I think we have different rulebooks. My Mongoose HG very clearly says 5 crew for Free Trader, Far Trader and Safari ships. Marava is 6.
Marava Far Trader:
Image
4 crew + 2 optional gunners.

Beowulf Free Trader:
Image
5 crew.

Subbie:
Image
5 crew.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:32 pm

OK. We have the same book.

Why does a fully crewed Marava have 4 crew and not 6? The weapons are factory fit.

Rulebook errata question: Why isn't it 7? The other 200 dton adventure ships have a base crew of 5 and somehow the Marava has 4.

What's you opinion on the stateroom definition in High Guard saying it contains a kitchen, bathroom and a single bed, or two if dual occupancy? That does prevent double occupancy being two small staterooms, which also has some weird interaction with the "per stateroom" maintenance costs. Why are staterooms not barracks?

Note that "it's common for a medic to double as a steward" doesn't mean that it's a great idea. It's going to be harder to sell those passenger tickets. Probably more so if there's low berths involved.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:03 pm

Moppy wrote: Why does a fully crewed Marava have 4 crew and not 6? The weapons are factory fit.

Rulebook errata question: Why isn't it 7? The other 200 dton adventure ships have a base crew of 5 and somehow the Marava has 4.
It's a copy of the CT S7 Type A2 Empress Marava. One crew-member doing two jobs and optional gunners were chosen by the original designer and was completely compliant with the rules. Any additional crew-members were of course expected to displace passenger capacity.

Moppy wrote: What's you opinion on the stateroom definition in High Guard saying it contains a kitchen, bathroom and a single bed, or two if dual occupancy? That does prevent double occupancy being two small staterooms, which also has some weird interaction with the "per stateroom" maintenance costs.
"Stateroom" can unfortunately mean both the standardised space for one person and one cabin:
CT TSC wrote: STATEROOMS
Dual occupancy staterooms are computed at MCr0.25 and 2 tons per person. It is not necessary to purchase an entire stateroom just to accomodate an odd number of crewmembers; a half-stateroom or large triple-occupancy stateroom can be built.
So, 1.5 stateroom(crewspace) (6 Dt) can be a large triple-occupancy stateroom(cabin) or perhaps three small staterooms(cabins).
HG, p21 wrote: Staterooms represent the living space for both crew and passengers on ships. A single stateroom contains living and sleeping facilities, including a bed, fresher and a very basic kitchen.
It does not have to be a single cabin, it's entirely up to the deck plan designer.
Not all the tonnage allocated to a stateroom necessarily goes to the stateroom itself; ...
Common areas and corridors come out of the stateroom budget, so the "stateroom" is generally divided among several cabins or rooms.

Moppy wrote: Why are staterooms not barracks?
Barracks are much cheaper bare-bones accommodations, it's still 2 Dt per person like dual occupancy. Nothing is said about how the allocated tonnage is divided into cabins; it can be 100 bunks per dormitory, or 1 bunk per cabin, just as you see fit.

Note that the barracks still include freshers, kitchens, corridors, etc. Since we call it barracks the expectation is probably bigger dormitories with separate freshers and galleys, but it can be smaller cabins with individual heads and kitchenettes if the designer so wish.

Moppy wrote: Note that "it's common for a medic to double as a steward" doesn't mean that it's a great idea. It's going to be harder to sell those passenger tickets. Probably more so if there's low berths involved.
There is no expectation of carrying MDs on space ships.

Why would it be considered unsafe for the med-tech to be ever-present and bring you drinks? Actual medical tasks would only be a few hours a week or so on small ships.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Spacecraft Operations - Running Costs

Postby Moppy » Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:43 am

I don't believe you should mix rules from different editions and can't quite see how that works.

CT is quite flexible regarding staterooms.

However it's clear in Mongoose how staterooms are supposed to work, because there's a line in the dual occupancy rules about the lack of privacy that it brings, which means they are sharing facilities. It isn't two half-size cabins.

There's also a note about "many" commercial captains insisting on dual occupancy, but that's not a rule. However, we can assume that extra crew might not automatically be using spare passenger staterooms because of this note, and because the cost for the stateroom is a sizable % of the crewmember's salary.

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:03 pm
Moppy wrote: Note that "it's common for a medic to double as a steward" doesn't mean that it's a great idea. It's going to be harder to sell those passenger tickets. Probably more so if there's low berths involved.
There is no expectation of carrying MDs on space ships.

Why would it be considered unsafe for the med-tech to be ever-present and bring you drinks? Actual medical tasks would only be a few hours a week or so on small ships.
Having checked, I cannot a find a minimum medical skill required to be a Traveller ship's medic, and level-0 qualifies(!). So I will concede this point, however, ships need to carry prescription medicines and be able to tend to a patient for a week, so in reality I doubt that medic-0 would pass the space medic exam. In Mongoose I would expect medic-1 (paramedic/nurse). Somewhere some legal authority is probably going to insist on full doctors for dedicated passenger ships above a certain size, and minimum manning regulations would come into play to prevent multi-taskng (the same regs that prevent ships running around everywhere with zero crew). A free trader can probably avoid this.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests