Cargo manipulation

[Condottiere]

No phishing.

 

[Infojunky]

Perhaps tractor/pressor beams exist, Artificial gravity or inertial compensators don't necessarily translate into working tech.

This is a case where I would go back to sources of inspiration. i.e. one of the literary models that Traveller's Tech curves where modeled after, in this case H. Beam Piper. Looking at Contragravity in Piper's work we see short ranged Gravity based Manipulators in a couple of forms, one being the floating palette jack the other being a Manipulator attached to a Jeep that could lift and secure loads.

Also if one looks at the number of precision Docking arrangements of smallcraft, one quickly surmises there is very local gravity effects in play.

 

[phavoc]

Perhaps tractor/pressor beams exist, Artificial gravity or inertial compensators don't necessarily translate into working tech.

This is a case where I would go back to sources of inspiration. i.e. one of the literary models that Traveller's Tech curves where modeled after, in this case H. Beam Piper. Looking at Contragravity in Piper's work we see short ranged Gravity based Manipulators in a couple of forms, one being the floating palette jack the other being a Manipulator attached to a Jeep that could lift and secure loads.

Also if one looks at the number of precision Docking arrangements of smallcraft, one quickly surmises there is very local gravity effects in play.

 

[-Daniel-]

Perhaps tractor/pressor beams exist, Artificial gravity or inertial compensators don't necessarily translate into working tech.

This is a case where I would go back to sources of inspiration. i.e. one of the literary models that Traveller's Tech curves where modeled after, in this case H. Beam Piper. Looking at Contragravity in Piper's work we see short ranged Gravity based Manipulators in a couple of forms, one being the floating palette jack the other being a Manipulator attached to a Jeep that could lift and secure loads.

Also if one looks at the number of precision Docking arrangements of smallcraft, one quickly surmises there is very local gravity effects in play.

phavoc, did you mean to add a comment to the post?

 

[phavoc]

phavoc, did you mean to add a comment to the post?

Ugh. Yes. The board ate it when I tried to edit it.

I was going back to the comment about inspiration - H. Beam Piper. In Space Vikings (and Lord Kalvan and Little Fuzzy), the anti-grav systems operated like air rafts, or grav belts. However Piper didn't (at least as far as I recall) ever talk about other forms of gravity manipulation along the lines of a tractor/pressor beam. He did envision control of gravity, and vehicles/robots that could do that. But people required vehicles, there weren't any man portable devices like Traveller has.

One has to keep in mind the time frame Piper was writing from. All his tech concepts were basically scalar (planetbusters and hellburners were simply scaled up atomic weapons, contragravity was no different than flying, just more self contained. Ships still flew around with armor and no shields, the primary weapons were missiles and guns - no energy weaponry at all). Even the idea of inertial compensators was sidestepped - it wasn't even an issue. You could call it 1950s in space. Which is why some of the CT concepts seem rather dated today as we know more about science and what things are capable of.

The other comment I had as that if you liked the Piper stuff, Carr has continued to work with authors or himself to publish additional novels set in all three Piper universes (or timelines for Lord Kalvan). Some of them are quite good, while others have the same 50s style of writing going on. Great for Piper fans, but if you aren't, you may not like them.

 

[Condottiere]

As I recall, in Space Viking, the Vikings made extensive use of automation and presumable robotic coolies, though in their colonized planet, they employed the natives as well, though also gradually qualified them to work with more sophisticated equipment.

 

[phavoc]

As I recall, in Space Viking, the Vikings made extensive use of automation and presumable robotic coolies, though in their colonized planet, they employed the natives as well, though also gradually qualified them to work with more sophisticated equipment.

That's quite correct. Although in the follow-on Space Viking books put out by Pequod press, having human servants was considered the more elite (and some of the societies didn't embrace robotics). All of the robots in Piper's books though were functional and not humanistic. They resembled more R2-D2 than C3-PO. That and they didn't talk (for the most part), but could take simple voice commands. The more sophisticated ones (machinery wise) followed the commands of the central controller as their programming was rather limited.

 

[Condottiere]

The more civilized overpopulated planet needed work programmes.

Seems there were no Greek city-state colonization ventures.

 

[hivemindx]

I've been thinking about cargo so I came up with some 'standard' cargo container sizes. These are based off the trade rules which indicate there are major cargoes in 10 ton blocks, minor ones in 5 ton blocks and incidental in batches of 1 ton. This is to help with role-playing, so the players have an idea of what their hold looks like. The deck plans don't seem specific enough to allow you to determine exactly how many containers you have and where they fit in the hold so these are not designed for that. In fact you'll find that you can't fit 82 tons of these containers in to the cargo bay of the Free Trader so there's no point in trying. If you wanted to do that then I think you need to assume either that the hold and therefore the containers can be taller or that the hold has a nominal capacity of 82 tons and a usable capacity more like 70 based on the requirement to have space to work and load and the fact that containers don't go in to all those strange corners and angled bits.

I read what people had to say about the height, but I think that the cargo bay may be designed with little or no inter-deck ducting, meaning you get close to the full 3m and that it is ok to have barely enough clearance to lift the container off the floor. Based on that the containers are mostly 2.6m tall with one (that cargo handlers probably detest) that is 2.7m.

I wanted the containers to fit roughly in to the 1.5m deck plan grid, although some of them have 'half squares' in one dimension.

For the purposes of interstellar shipping regulations, 10 tons of cargo is the amount of cargo that fits inside a 10 ton cargo container. The client loses the volume that the actual walls of the container take up. If you don't like it take it up with the Imperial shipping standards authority.


Cargo Length Width Height dTons 1.5m squares Notes
Major 9 6 2.6 10 6 x 4
Major 12 4.5 2.6 10 8 x 3 Double wide 40' container
Major 18 3 2.6 10 12 x 2
Minor 12 2.25 2.6 5 8 x 1.5 40' container
Minor 9 3 2.6 5 6 x 2
Minor 4.5 6 2.6 5 3 x 4
Incidental 3.75 1.5 2.5 1 2.5 x 1 Long/High Ford Transit van
Incidental 2.25 2.25 2.7 1 1.5 x 1.5
Incidental 3.75 3 1.3 1 2.5 x 2 x 0.5 Stack 2 high
Mid Passenger 1.5 1.5 0.6 0.1 1 x 1 x 0.25 Stack 4 high
Mid Passenger 0.75 0.75 2.6 0.1 0.5 x 0.5
Mid Passenger 2.25 0.75 0.8 0.1 1.5 x 0.5 x 0.3 Coffin, Stack 3 high

 

[PsiTraveller]

there is a book by Marc Levinson called "The Box". It is about how the cargo container changed the world. First container in 1956 and now they are everywhere.
http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8131.pdf Sample of the first 16 pages of the book.

Break bulk cargo, carrying in stuff by hand was slow. A ship was in port for a week or more. The "on the Waterfront" lifestyle of a lot of casual labour (longshoreman) close to the docks supplied the hands needed to carry everything out of the hold by hand, sort it all next to the ship and then put everything back inside. It is what let a merchant sailor have a wife in every port. They spent the time waiting for the ship to be emptied and refilled.

"The Port of New York needed 1.9 man-hours to handle a ton of cargo in 1950, but 2.5 by 1956. In Britain, tonnage per man-year was nearly flat from 1948 to 1952, leaped by one-third thanks to a surge of cargo in 1953, and then sank again under the weight of stringent work rules."

The loss in productivity was due to labour disputes, but carrying bags of cement out of a ship is slow work. That is ton weight not volume, so if 1DT is 14 m3 and packed full of bags you are looking at days to carry things out at a break bulk port.

Space docks may be faster, and scanning of labels may make it possible to move cargo away from the dock as it comes out, but moving stuff by hand sucks. Cargo cranes move a container every 2 minutes and can empty and fill a ship in 20 hours.

For small traders moving pallets of goods will be preferred.

 

[Condottiere]

We have the freedom to customize the blueprints of the ships.

Commercial shipping would have an agreed upon set of standards to simplify transport and handling, so holds would be built around packing.

Since shipping companies try to keep their ships filled and constantly in service, the ability to load and unload quickly allows a faster turnaround; that mortgage won't pay itself.

 

[-Daniel-]

I've been thinking about cargo so I came up with some 'standard' cargo container sizes. These are based off the trade rules which indicate there are major cargoes in 10 ton blocks, minor ones in 5 ton blocks and incidental in batches of 1 ton. This is to help with role-playing, so the players have an idea of what their hold looks like. The deck plans don't seem specific enough to allow you to determine exactly how many containers you have and where they fit in the hold so these are not designed for that. In fact you'll find that you can't fit 82 tons of these containers in to the cargo bay of the Free Trader so there's no point in trying. If you wanted to do that then I think you need to assume either that the hold and therefore the containers can be taller or that the hold has a nominal capacity of 82 tons and a usable capacity more like 70 based on the requirement to have space to work and load and the fact that containers don't go in to all those strange corners and angled bits.

I read what people had to say about the height, but I think that the cargo bay may be designed with little or no inter-deck ducting, meaning you get close to the full 3m and that it is ok to have barely enough clearance to lift the container off the floor. Based on that the containers are mostly 2.6m tall with one (that cargo handlers probably detest) that is 2.7m.

I wanted the containers to fit roughly in to the 1.5m deck plan grid, although some of them have 'half squares' in one dimension.

For the purposes of interstellar shipping regulations, 10 tons of cargo is the amount of cargo that fits inside a 10 ton cargo container. The client loses the volume that the actual walls of the container take up. If you don't like it take it up with the Imperial shipping standards authority.

Cargo         Length Width	Height	dTons	1.5m squares	 Notes
Major         9       6      2.6      10      6 x 4	
Major         12      4.5    2.6      10      8 x 3           Double wide 40' container
Major         18      3      2.6      10      12 x 2	
Minor         12      2.25   2.6      5       8 x 1.5         40' container
Minor         9       3      2.6      5       6 x 2	
Minor         4.5     6      2.6      5       3 x 4	
Incidental    3.75    1.5    2.5      1       2.5 x 1         Long/High Ford Transit van
Incidental    2.25    2.25   2.7      1       1.5 x 1.5	
Incidental    3.75    3      1.3      1       2.5 x 2 x 0.5   Stack 2 high
Mid Passenger 1.5     1.5    0.6      0.1     1 x 1 x 0.25    Stack 4 high
Mid Passenger 0.75    0.75   2.6      0.1     0.5 x 0.5	
Mid Passenger 2.25    0.75   0.8      0.1     1.5 x 0.5 x 0.3 Coffin, Stack 3 high

I like this. Quite interesting attempt to come up with a selection of standard sizes.

 

[Condottiere]

If someone does standardize it, you have to remember that they have to be commercially convenient.