Al Morai J4 Long Haul Trader (and random HG ship build poll)

[Jeraa]

As has been mentioned, if you want to transport cargo
over a long distance by plane, you use a truck to deliver the cargo to the plane and another truck to distribute the cargo once the plane has landed, but
it would be a somewhat bizarre idea to transport the truck on the plane, too.

Correct, because planes can not go everywhere a truck can. A more accurate modern day depiction of what this is, would be using one plane to deliver the cargo to the bigger plane, then the bigger plane delivering the cargo to a smaller plane at its destination, with no trucks at all.

Since spacecraft can go everywhere, however, there is no actual need to transfer the cargo. Which also means there is less chance said cargo could be damaged or lost because of sloppy handling while transferring it from ship to ship.

 

[rust]

So using a J4 ship to move the goods actually means you need more ships, larger ships, more crew, and more time.

But the two J2 ships could undertake profitable cargo runs while the J4 ship is
in transit, and the J4 ship would not have to sit idle while waiting for the J2
ship to return with new cargo.

With only the J4 tender and one J2 ship, the tender would cross the gap and
release the J2 ship - and then have to wait at least two weeks for the ship
to return. Once it has crossed the gap in the other direction, the same hap-
pens, the tender again sits idle until the J2 ship returns after at least two
weeks. The J4 tender would sit idle for 2 weeks for every week it is in jump
space crossing the gap. And a ship that is inactive for two thirds of the year
is hardly profitable.

With a J4 cargo ship that works with J2 ships at both ends of the gap the car-
go runs of all ships could be timed to reduce the idle time significantly and to
keep all ships earning a profit almost all of the time.

 

[Jeraa]

It wouldn't have to wait. Remember I said in an earlier post this is not a solution for small time merchants - it is for larger merchants who would have transport routes, and several ships moving goods.

So the tender ferries a ship across the gap and either waits for a third merchant vessel to shortly arrive (not the one it ferried, another one headed in the opposite direction). Or, the tender can charge other vessels and ferry them back across the gap, which means it is making money, as well as the merchants.

With a J4 cargo ship that works with J2 ships at both ends of the gap the cargo runs of all ships could be timed to reduce the idle time significantly and to keep all ships earning a profit almost all of the time.

If something like this can be timed, then it can also be timed so a tender releases its ferried craft, and docks with a merchant waiting to cross that same gap in the opposite direction.

I've said this is a solution for larger companies. Fact is, if there is enough traffic to have a supply line of merchant vessels, there would probably be a demand for passage of other vessels across the same gap such as passenger lingers or personal craft, and so someone there would running a ferry doing this exact same thing. Only difference there is the merchant company would be paying someone else to ferry the ship instead of doing it themselves (and potentially making money from ships offering to pay for a ride.)

Assuming the gap is along a trading route, and not to some backwater planet, there will be people wanting to cross it. Since most craft wouldn't be able to make it on their own (not being J4), someone would realize there is profit to be made there and so start a ferry service. Where there is money to be made, there will be someone there ready and willing to take it. There will be a ferry. The real question would be if it was operated by the merchant company, or a third party.

 

[rust]

Somehow you seem to be moving the goal posts a little ... :wink:

First it was:

If the merchants attached themselves to a tender, you only need 2 ships: the merchant, and the tender.

And then it became:

So the tender ferries a ship across the gap and either waits for a third merchant vessel to shortly arrive (not the one it ferried, another one headed in the opposite direction).

I still think there would be more profit to be made if the J4 ship carried cargo
instead of another ship, but I am too lazy to do the design work and calcula-
tions now, it is a bit after midnight over here.

 

[Jeraa]

No, I didn't change anything. It does only require two ships to cross the gap: the tender and the merchant. Switching cargo between ships requires 3. A one-way trip with a tender only requires 2 ships.

It was mentioned the tender just sitting there doing nothing while the merchant was elsewhere. Thats not the case. Remember I said this was a solution for a merchant company, not individual merchants. Thats where the second quote comes from, which dealing with a two-way trip: across the gap and back again. Because trade moves in both directions, not only one. If there is traffic heading one way, there is traffic heading the opposite. And a merchant company with only one ship is a poor company indeed.

And, that third ship? Doesn't even need to belong to the company itself. IF it is a trade route, there will be traffic in both directions, and people willing to pay to cross the gap. IF the captain of the tender decides to just sit there, he is an idiot and deserves to be fired. No one who is in the business of transporting things over large gaps would just sit around doing nothing with people all around him willing to pay him for his services.

 

[rust]

So what you get is very much like the LASH ship from GURPS Far Trader, a
huge jump tender which can transport either several 800 dton cargo barges
(they have their own maneuver drives) or any ship up to 800 dtons instead
of one of the barges. The LASH tender jumps into a system, where new bar-
ges and/or ships are already waiting at the 100D line, releases the barges or
ships it ferried and docks the waiting ones (among them one or more fuel
barges), and then jumps right back after only a few hours.

If this is approximately your concept, I have no problem with it.

 

[DFW]

Yes a ship with higher jump capability would be needed, but you don't have to provide this yourself thus needing two ships with their associated costs.

I'm not talking about doing this for an entire route, just to serve what may amount to just a couple of J4 links with the rest of the route being say J2 links.

You're back to squeezing the toothpaste back and forth. There is no reduction in cost here. SOMEONE has to pay, and it will be the ships hitching a ride unless there is a J-ship fairy. :wink:

 

[far-trader]

So what you get is very much like the LASH ship...

If this is approximately your concept, I have no problem with it.

That's what I figured it was from the start. Heck I've even designed them for MTU, including a J4 luxury liner that had room aboard to ferry (up to 6?) Yahcts for passengers letting them cross gulfs that the standard 2 xJ1 wouldn't. Like what is done for current day sailing yachts that want to change from cruising one side of the ocean for the other.

The only problem I had with the proposed idea is that it will be cheaper. It won't be. Not for the shipper which is the only person that matters in the equation.

Cheaper for the J2 ships, yes.

Economical for the J4 carriers, yes.

Lower costs to ship X plus the J2 ship carrying it across J4 than using a J4 ship to ship X. No. Impossible.

No one will set up a route with J2 ships that relies on a J4 ferry. They'll set up separate J2 routes on each link and ship JUST THE GOODS* by the J4 ferry across the gaps.

* but I don't believe there's much business in shipping stuff more than 1 jump myself, stuff that is valuable enough to ship more than 1 parsec will go by ships that can do it in 1 jump, realistically prices will factor in the delay of shipping by multiple jumps and price those ships out of long distance hauling

Anyway, interesting discussion, please continue if you like

I'm off to polish up the MgT rebuild of those Al Morai Satellite class Shuttles above to post here. I'm happy and not about them. Didn't get to fit all I wanted into them, but they come out closer to original that way. The price was much lower (but I'm padding extras in to try and bring it up) which helps the bottom line.

And I'm reasonably happy with the draft deckplan (just the Shuttles, don't get too excited, I'm not that fast ) but need to polish that up some before posting it.

 

[AndrewW]

You're back to squeezing the toothpaste back and forth. There is no reduction in cost here. SOMEONE has to pay, and it will be the ships hitching a ride unless there is a J-ship fairy. :wink:

Yes there would likely be a fee for this. But I'm talking about a fee for that compared to all the extra income from larger cargo space / more passenger staterooms/low berths. The extra income gained could easily pay the fee with plenty left over.

 

[DFW]

Yes there would likely be a fee for this. But I'm talking about a fee for that compared to all the extra income from larger cargo space / more passenger staterooms/low berths. The extra income gained could easily pay the fee with plenty left over.

Nope. Not unless you are ignoring the cost of the carrier ship and for some reason, that is operating at perpetual, HUGE loss.

 

[far-trader]

You're back to squeezing the toothpaste back and forth. There is no reduction in cost here. SOMEONE has to pay, and it will be the ships hitching a ride unless there is a J-ship fairy. :wink:

Yes there would likely be a fee for this. But I'm talking about a fee for that compared to all the extra income from larger cargo space / more passenger staterooms/low berths. The extra income gained could easily pay the fee with plenty left over.

I don't think you're quite seeing it yet.

Here, let's use an example that's clearer than the toothpaste analogy:

Your Far-Trader, a 200ton J2 ship with 64tons cargo contracts to carry a full load at freight rates across J4. You'll earn Cr1,600 per ton, a nice increase over your usual Cr1,200 per ton. A bonus of Cr25,600. However the J4 ferry will charge you freight rate for your ship, 200tons at Cr1,600 per ton for a total of Cr320,000. A net loss for you of Cr294,400. Unless you pass that on to your customer, who is going to tell you where to go in very colourful language as he signs his 64tons of business over to the J4 ferry at the same Cr1,600 per ton rate.

See what we're getting at? It only makes sense to ferry your ship if you want to explore new trade opportunities you normally couldn't get to. And it will cost you a lot of money to make that move. But you will be able to shave a little off that by filling your own hold on the trip.

Oh yeah, and it makes no difference if that Far-Trader is a single owner ship or part of a line of ships. The rates stay the same and you lose a ton of money every time you ferry the J2 ship over a J4 gap.

 

[AndrewW]

We are talking about multiple stops. Say you have 5 stops on the route and only one requires the jump-4. You multiply the amount of freed up space across all those versus the one fee for the jump-4 passage.

So you can give the ship jump-4 capability for the 1 in four places it will be needed, or you can pay a fee for that one place and instead get a lot more space to haul stuff around for all of the stops along the way.

Anyways, anyone can do it however they wish in their games.

 

[far-trader]

Updated first post page 1 with corrected stat block of Al Morai World class Bulk Transport for redesigned Satellite class Shuttles and included updated notes and stat block of same .

 

[far-trader]

We are talking about multiple stops. Say you have 5 stops on the route and only one requires the jump-4. You multiply the amount of freed up space across all those versus the one fee for the jump-4 passage.

So you can give the ship jump-4 capability for the 1 in four places it will be needed, or you can pay a fee for that one place and instead get a lot more space to haul stuff around for all of the stops along the way.

Anyways, anyone can do it however they wish in their games.

This sounds more like building the ship with J4 drives but using only enough fuel to make the required jump for each leg, using demountable fuel tanks, and utilizing the space not needed for fuel on the shorter runs to carry more cargo. Is that what you've been meaning?

That is a different idea all together, and will work quite nicely to make the route more profitable.

Not that it applies to the Al Morai line as I recall. Most of the legs are J4, being optimized for that. There might be a couple of shorter ones where the idea could be implemented. I may have to review the route and note that and build the deckplan accordingly. I have a (very) little excess tonnage I might be able to sneak into that as a modular feature. If not, demountable tanks should work as well.

 

[atpollard]

Railroads employed helper (steam) locomotives to assist long trains up short segments of steep slopes. The main locomotive hauls the freight across the country and the helper just travels back and forth along one short segment helping every train that comes along.

The concept is not unreasonable, and only a detailed look at the economic details (and design rules) will show it to be viable or non-viable. It may be cheaper than hauling a J4 drive and fuel across eleven 2 parsec jumps so it can cross one J4 gap two times per year.

And the ship would be closer to the CT Jump Shuttle.

 

[Jeraa]

And you can't get a detailed look at the economic details, as this is all just theory. If we had specific worlds, and trade goods to look at, then maybe something can be decided And even if proven non-viable (or viable) for a given area, it doesn't mean the same would work in another place. Which is part of the reason I haven't designed ships for this, because even the ship would vary depending on the area.

So yeah, in theory/concept a tender system may work. But we can not say for sure unless we have actual world/trade data to work with.

 

[AndrewW]

This sounds more like building the ship with J4 drives but using only enough fuel to make the required jump for each leg, using demountable fuel tanks, and utilizing the space not needed for fuel on the shorter runs to carry more cargo. Is that what you've been meaning?

Nope I was meaning what I said. But enough, there's no point in continuing this.

 

[far-trader]

Nope I was meaning what I said. But enough, there's no point in continuing this.

Whatever. Just trying to get my head wrapped around where you're coming from. I see now in the previous where you said:

So you can give the ship jump-4 capability for the 1 in four places it will be needed...

You meant by carrying it on another ship, I guess. I took it to mean you literally gave your ship the capability to J4 itself in that instance.

Yeah, nobody is really budging, or maybe even saying the same thing, far enough side tracked I guess

 

[far-trader]

...I haven't designed ships for this, because even the ship would vary depending on the area.

Truth. Mainly why I picked a known (if not really thought through) specific route case. Also what I did for my long haul luxury liner design which had a specific route.

 

[steelbrok]

I'd just like to say thanks for posting the design, I use Al Morai in my campaign and this is very useful