Going up a tech Level

S

simonh

Mongoose
Pocketable 64-bit touchscreen computers, smartphones now outselling dumb phones, ubiquitous GPS tracking, actually workable voice command systems, UAV drones, guns firing laser-ranged smart grenades that you tell what range to explode at.

Is this what it feels like to go up a Tech Level?

I'm in my 40s so I'm sure we've gone up at least one TL in my lifetime, but where would you draw the line?

Simon Hibbs
 
I'm in my 40s too, and certainly feel like we've crossed a significant line. Pointing definitively to that line isn't easy, though.

Traveller's Tech levels are a spectrum that is merely descriptive of historical Earth up to the present, and are arbitrarily speculative after the present. Those lines aren't much use outside of the context of the game universe.

2300AD uses the distinction between old and new, military and commercial technology to draw a series of lines. But this assumes military tech is more advanced across the board, which is not always the case. The electronics in many of the latest fighters look hopelessly obsolete next to those in your phone because their development programmes take decades and cannot change as quickly as the pace of technological advancement. this is one reason for simpler, smarter, cheaper weapons programmes.

One fascinating pair of lines for tech levels is drawn by Bruce Sterling in this book:

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/shaping-things

He posits two lines for a tech level change (Technoculture Revolution, in his terms):

The Line of No Return
"We know there has been a revolution in technoculture when that technolculture cannot voluntarily return to the previous technoculture condition."

The line of Empire
"We know that this revolution has become the new status quo when even the fiercest proponents of the earlier technoculture cannot physically overwhelm and defeat the new one. ... That's the line of Empire."
Click to expand...

So, for example, a society that would cause masses to starve to death by trying to go back to, say, pre-mechanised farming has crossed a line of no return. A society that can dominate others militarily and economically because of their superior technologies has crossed a line of empire.

The question is, therefore, can we go back to pre-internet, smart device days without unbearable economic consequences? I'd say not. Can a society deploying these technologies dominate another without them in business and warfare. Very likely. Up one tech level.

J
 
simonh said:
Pocketable 64-bit touchscreen computers, smartphones now outselling dumb phones, ubiquitous GPS tracking, actually workable voice command systems, UAV drones, guns firing laser-ranged smart grenades that you tell what range to explode at.

Is this what it feels like to go up a Tech Level?
Click to expand...

1/2 a TL. The last half of TL 7. Ubiquitous micro-electronics.
 
simonh said:
Pocketable 64-bit touchscreen computers, smartphones now outselling dumb phones, ubiquitous GPS tracking, actually workable voice command systems, UAV drones, guns firing laser-ranged smart grenades that you tell what range to explode at.

Is this what it feels like to go up a Tech Level?

I'm in my 40s so I'm sure we've gone up at least one TL in my lifetime, but where would you draw the line?

Simon Hibbs
Click to expand...

I'm in my 40's as well, at least for a little bit more time, ugh. However, I was inoculated against being too wowed by the new electronics by friends who worked in the field. Technology is a strange term though, and the tech levels are a bit wonky as a game-ism. Weapons and military gear, it is different, for example - use in environment: we used radios from WW2 in the late 80's not just because they were cheap (which they were), but they were also resistant to emp. So yep, fun fun fighting in the post-flash battlefield; and I'm redundant myself, no more tanks even in my ACR - which is now a CSR - all wheeled vehicles. So, a totally different mission.

For me, well be TL8 when we get a grip on Fusion.
 
Properly reusable launch vehicles are a biggie. Maybe SpaceX will push us over the edge? We're still heavily reliant on (minor refinements of) 70s rocket technology. Cutting launch costs by a factor of 10 or even 100 would be a big deal, perhaps comparable to crude gravitic technology in it's effect on space development.

Simon Hibbs
 
simonh said:
Properly reusable launch vehicles are a biggie. Maybe SpaceX will push us over the edge? We're still heavily reliant on (minor refinements of) 70s rocket technology. Cutting launch costs by a factor of 10 or even 100 would be a big deal, perhaps comparable to crude gravitic technology in it's effect on space development.

Simon Hibbs
Click to expand...

IMO, much of it being used because that is what is hanging about, just slap a new coat of paint on the old girl (ICBM) or use the real biggies, such as the Saturn - 1960's tech. That is sort of the thing I was trying to describe, that technology in real life works in a weird way. But reusable lifters are good, like a space-plane? The caveat there is the huge amount of R&D any project like that entails, the USAF, took theirs off the board due to budget cuts.
 
We will be TL8 when graphene based electronics replace the crude circuitry we use today.

We will be TL8 when we have fusion power stations providing cheap energy for all.

We will be TL8 when we have man-portable laser weapons.

I'd place us as high as TL7.8

The Traveller TL scale is debatable - there have been key technological and scientific discoveries which completely change the way we live:

mastery of simple chemical processes such as combustion and thermal decomposition of limestone (prehistoric)

metal smelting and agriculture (bronze age)

iron age

steam engine, industrial production of steel

discovery of the electromagnetic spectrum and the link between magnetism, electricity and light, electricity generation

atomic theory,micro-electronics

space age, 3d printing, nano technology - where we are now

fusion age - TL8

gravity manipulation, jump drive - TL9

nuclear damper technology, meson screens and weapons - TL12
 
dragoner said:
But reusable lifters are good, like a space-plane? The caveat there is the huge amount of R&D any project like that entails, the USAF, took theirs off the board due to budget cuts.
Click to expand...

Not a space plane. Hope that link works, I can't reach Youtube from work so it's linked blind. There's also a wikipedia page but it's nowhere near as cool. Bear in mind they've already tested the first stage landing systems and hope to recover the first live launch first stage next year.

The 60s tests had their budget cut because they were never going to work. The technology of the day just wasn't up to it. Even with today's far superior manufacturing and materials technology, SpaceX's plan is only feasible for significantly reduced payloads (perhaps 30% lower) compared to fully expendable vehicles.

Spaceplanes may well happen one day. SABRE is a pretty interesting technology. The problem with those though is that while they are highly efficient, they are only good for small payloads. There's a lower maximum limit on the practical size of the vehicle compared to rocket stacks, and a lot more of the vehicle mass is made up of stuff like undercarriage, lifting surfaces and such than on a rocket.

Simon Hibbs
 
Sigtrygg said:
We will be TL8 when graphene based electronics replace the crude circuitry we use today.

We will be TL8 when we have fusion power stations providing cheap energy for all.
Click to expand...

But if those never become viable, does that mean we'll never get past TL 7?


We will be TL8 when we have man-portable laser weapons.
Click to expand...

I have my doubts that those will ever exceed the capabilities of projectile weapons. IMR type propellants are an extremely efficient energy storage and release system. I can't see batteries beating them any time soon. Also medium power lasers suitable for personal weapons use are too easily defeated by lightweight ablative protection or aerosols. It's hard to beat a kinetic weapon's penetrative ability, though lasers may be adopted for some uses.

The Traveller TL scale is debatable - there have been key technological and scientific discoveries which completely change the way we live:
...
space age, 3d printing, nano technology - where we are now

fusion age - TL8

gravity manipulation, jump drive - TL9

nuclear damper technology, meson screens and weapons - TL12
Click to expand...

Setting aside fantasy technologies such as gravitics, I think we're fairly close to advancing a full TL over the 70s. They had computers back then, but they were pretty crude and only used in very specialised applications. They had launchers but they weren't meaningfully reusable, even the Shuttle cost so much to refurbish it actually cost more than a fully expendable system would have been. We has decent planes, but now we have UAVs, ship killer missiles, smart bombs and even combat robots in the works.

I give it another 5 years max, and I say that knowing full well that technologies predicted to be 'ready in 3 to 5 years' usually take a decade if they ever arrive at all.

Simon Hibbs
 
simonh said:
Spaceplanes may well happen one day.
Click to expand...

No, I am talking recently; the US military has changed mission, it just wasn't seen as essential, same as with the Shuttle. I have seen the Space X stuff, interesting, but it is old tech, but getting things into orbit is old hat by now.
 
F33D said:
EXTREMELY wasteful of fuel and as a result, mission limiting over a lifting body system. Do you know why this is?
Click to expand...

In theory yes, but there are no lifting body orbital launch systems above the size of a microsat (I'm thinking Pegasus). Even the most optimistic lifting body/air breathing designs have small cargo capacities and low traget orbit profiles. SpaceX is aiming firmly at the heavy lifter category.

Rockets routinely carry a reserve of extra fuel over the estimated requirement as a safety margin. The plan is to use that, plus a little extra, to land propulsively. They use a very efficient suicide burn for the landing, plus a small amount for orientation and maneuvering. It's not as bad as it seems. They considered using parachutes, but they have their own problems including requiring considerable strengthening of the vehicle to take the stress, plus lack of control over the landing site.

They estimate that for a Falcon 9-R launch they will lose about 30% of the launch capacity over a fully disposable launch. For Falcon Heavy, which uses three first stage boosters side by side, it's a much lower overhead. Heavy will use something called Asparagus staging, where the two outer first stage boosters will feed fuel into the central one so that when they detach, the central booster is still fully fueled. A side effect is that the side boosters detach at a lower altitude than they otherwise would, meaning they are much easier to recover. Nobody's ever used asparagus staging before and it's a huge advance in efficiency by itself, which should offset much of the loss of capacity from propulsive first stage recovery. So paradoxically Heavy should make it much more efficient to recover at least some of the first stage boosters, though whether they'll be able to recover the central booster reliably and often is unknown at this stage as it will probably detach at a higher altitude than in other types of launches.

Simon Hibbs
 
F33D said:
No. In REALITY.
Click to expand...

Based on their successful first stage propulsive recovery burn test over the ocean, during a live satellite launch last month, we should see how limiting it is in reality when they attempt a first stage recovery next year. I hope that will be real enough for you.

Simon Hibbs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top