Mating Airlocks to Cargo Hatches

[Vormaerin]

Yes, but that's irrelevant? The point is that the people who have those containers as part of their property originally are not going to routinely send them to some place that has no use for them except as sales.

Those containers you see in backwater places IRL probably are worn out ones sold used from a trucking company or a freight reshipper, not from a container ship dropping them off and going "you know what, you keep them".

 

[MarcusIII]

Those back waters will use things you would never imagine. Even in the U.S. there are people turning shipping containers into HOUSES. You think a poor back water world wouldn't do that? How about stables, garages, chicken coops, grain silos that the local rodent (equivalents) can't get into? The backwater ports will make extra money off them. PC's travelling about the world will see them everywhere.

Exactly. In a frontier backwater those containers would probably be the start of Main street or High Street. Being used for everything from Saloons to shops to bunk houses, etc.

 

[MarcusIII]

Those containers you see in backwater places IRL probably are worn out ones sold used from a trucking company or a freight reshipper, not from a container ship dropping them off and going "you know what, you keep them".

That's exactly what happens. It happened in the USA when it had a huge import imbalance. The end points of the shipping line got so full of them that they were giving them away.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Relating to earlier cargo container comments for small loads not being containerized, I'd instead argue that the one-ton container is likely very common in a merchant Traveller's experience. At 3 meters (height, I'd imagine) by 2.25 meters by two, they'll be able to put them where they likely want them without difficulty. Most of the cargoes they deal win are by the ton, and that would be what they use. It likely isn't vacuum proof as that isn't the standard, so as cheap as that kind of thing can be.

 

[rinku]

I still suspect that the cost of making a robust metal box airtight is small enough, that they normally are.

There is a cost overhead in making sure the unrated containers are handled differently to the vacuum rated ones. The more freight that can be shipped using one protocol, the better.

 

[Vormaerin]

That's exactly what happens. It happened in the USA when it had a huge import imbalance. The end points of the shipping line got so full of them that they were giving them away.

No, that's what happens when the system breaks down due to a change in the circumstances at a large port. Maersk or whomever chooses to do that when they can't avoid it. It is something that *can* happen, but that's not what we are talking about. Which is standard practice at rinky dink ports. No one is intentionally sending a container to some godforsaken port on a tramp freighter when they know it's never coming back as a normal practice. Ergo, a Free Trader shouldn't expect their cargo to be containerized.

Relating to earlier cargo container comments for small loads not being containerized, I'd instead argue that the one-ton container is likely very common in a merchant Traveller's experience. At 3 meters (height, I'd imagine) by 2.25 meters by two, they'll be able to put them where they likely want them without difficulty. Most of the cargoes they deal win are by the ton, and that would be what they use. It likely isn't vacuum proof as that isn't the standard, so as cheap as that kind of thing can be.

View attachment 5982

And those aren't the containers being discussed. Little containers like that are still general cargo, not containerized as the term is used in shipping. Breakbulk does not mean completely loose, except maybe for steel girders or the like. It means "not in a standardized container used by a commercial container ship." (Though it also has definitions related to how the bills of lading are organized). "Shipping Containers" are sized to be directly loaded onto a train or truck bed that's designed to exactly fit one (aka intermodal). A ship loaded with a bunch of those cargo boxes would not get sent to a container terminal. They'd be unloaded a breakbulk terminal. Because you are going to be handling lots of little whatevers instead of big standardized containers.

Breakbulk includes boxes, crates, pallets, drums, barrels, bales, bundles, and stuff like rolled steel and girders.

Regardless, it is only going to matter if you choose to make it matter. The game rules do not care what you are shipping or how it looks. It let's you put 10 tons of cargo on your safari ship which doesn't even have a cargo door on the deckplans just as easily as on your fat trader, which is about as optimized a cargo space as you can get.

If it does matter to you, do it however makes for the best game for your table.

I still suspect that the cost of making a robust metal box airtight is small enough, that they normally are.

It can be if you want it to be. It's the future, that might be super easy. The problem with vacuum rated is not being airtight. That's easy. It's being able to handle the pressure differential and the temperature difference. And, more importantly, protecting the contents from those things. Which normally means powered containers for a lot of the categories of things listed on the trade table. IRL, those sorts of containers are very much more expensive, but in the future? Who knows.

 

[MarcusIII]

I still suspect that the cost of making a robust metal box airtight is small enough, that they normally are.

Yes, it is a requirement under interstellar shipping regs IMTU. A major safety provision. Insurance companies won't insure cargo without it either.

 

[MarcusIII]

No, that's what happens when the system breaks down due to a change in the circumstances at a large port.

Nope. That wasn't the case regarding what I was talking about. The shipping system considers them as little more than expendable overhead.

 

[MarcusIII]

That's easy. It's being able to handle the pressure differential and the temperature difference.

No, temp control ≠ vacuum rated. Pressure yes. Which several TLs from now is nothing.

 

[MarcusIII]

The point is that the people who have those containers as part of their property originally are not going to routinely send them to some place that has no use for them except as sales.

That's what happens everyday, all day on Earth currently

 

[rinku]

A container in a vacuum is only going to have temperature issues if exposed to direct sunlight or something for an extended period. Which isn't likely to happen in the event of a hold depressurisation or cargo transfer through space.

 

[MarcusIII]

~40,000 iphones fit in a shipping container. The profit for the shipper (container owner) per phone is about $350 = $14 million profit. Wholesale price of NEW shipping container is about $3,500.

The shipper/owner of the container isn't spending a second or single $ of effort tracking the things and trying to get it back from Bumfck Egypt.

 

[OldGuy59]

How to dock non-standard ships to stations?

A lab ship, never intended to be docked to a station, and my view of how that would work, with a view to playing an encounter. The deck plans for the station were from the Starship Geomorph 2.0, by Robert Pearce. With "standard containers" .

 

[phavoc]

Lots of good discussions here about the future of containerization. One major point to keep in mind is that ocean-going containers are built differently than standard domestic containers. Ocean-going ones are much more sturdy since they stack higher and are exposed to corrosive sea water and much more harsher weather. Even with that requirement the cost of a steel open-sea rated container is relatively cheap - from around $3k for a 20' to around $4k (all in USD) for a 40' container. Costs, of course, rise and fall with market demand. This is the cost for one in a major port like Shanghai though, so building one elsewhere might incur a higher rate due to market, labor and other supply conditions.

Ocean-going containers are a major export to Asia from the US, though in many instances they go back empty. That rotation has varied depending on costs, and they have a finite-number of times to get used before they are scrapped or else sold off to become a storage box or whatever. I'd suspect you would be able to find empty containers at most any port that has an import/export market of any size.

I would assume most containers used for trade in Traveller would not be considered space-rated containers, so one would expect a Traveller-equivalent to be one that was built to the lowest possible TL standard in order for it to be built in as many locations as possible. Standardization is the byword of the Imperium and these would be no exception. Materials wise you'd expect them to be built of similar metal or even composites with enough structural integrity to transport their loads without issue. So they could easily be built at a TL-7 world or greater (TL-6 might be a bit too basic, though not impossible since we had similar ones in that timeframe in history). Being transported in holds means there is no need to build them to stand up to vacuum or exposure to radiation, which keeps their costs and TL down.

For container size I'd expect something similar to modern container standards - a half and a full-sized container (say 5dton and 10dton at 3m height). This simplifies all aspects of transport and handling. 3dton containers would also probably be around, if only for smaller ships and loads. While you may end up having smaller containers, I'd not consider them to be in the same class as the above ones.

Beyond that you'd probably see a mix of grav and wheeled vehicles for unloading. If you have access to grav tech (which any world would), one could attach lifters on top of either end or in the middle to maneuver the container in/out of a ship easily enough. Lifters of this type would be small enough to be carried onboad a ship for loading/unloading at lower-tech ports. Grav tech would free you up from having to restrict yourself to fixed-location container cranes or Mi-jack's on rails. You still may see such tech on lower tech worlds since it should be easily built and maintained locally and still works just fine for rail/trailer loads. For unloading larger ships you may see some form of internal grav-assisted loading mechanisms that would pick up and delivery containers to their storage locations. Even something as simpler as putting retractable wheels in deck plating (planes and air freight loading docks utilize something similar) gives you a large amount of flexibility with for a very low tech solution.

And, I'm sure, there will be new methods developed over the centuries with new forms of tech, just like it's been in our past.

 

[Vormaerin]

~40,000 iphones fit in a shipping container. The profit for the shipper (container owner) per phone is about $350 = $14 million profit. Wholesale price of NEW shipping container is about $3,500.

The shipper/owner of the container isn't spending a second or single $ of effort tracking the things and trying to get it back from Bumfck Egypt.

The *owner* of the container is almost never the owner of the contents. So, the value of the contents is not the issue. Also, containers are tracked not because of their cost, but because you need to have enough where they are used rather than piled up where they are not. But, regardless, this is a side issue.

Free Traders are not containerized in any sense of the word in logistics. Even if everything is packed in insulated, airtight steel boxes with magic liners that shift from holding gas to liquids to solids to live goods or anything else on the trade table, they are not operating like a container ship.

PC scale ships are too small. Their cargo bays are laid out wrong. They are going to ports with little or no infrastructure on a regular basis (Type D and Type E). They are operating like general cargo ships. Though, obviously, if you assume cheap ubiquitous anti grav to the point of being practically telekinesis, some of those problems go away.

As I have said many times, there are near infinite assumptions you can make about the technology and the infrastructure of the future. It works the way you like best. Because no one knows a thing about any of the actual parameters that will determine how it really works. And, frankly, it's not that important to game play.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Lots of good discussions here about the future of containerization. One major point to keep in mind is that ocean-going containers are built differently than standard domestic containers. Ocean-going ones are much more sturdy since they stack higher and are exposed to corrosive sea water and much more harsher weather. Even with that requirement the cost of a steel open-sea rated container is relatively cheap - from around $3k for a 20' to around $4k (all in USD) for a 40' container. Costs, of course, rise and fall with market demand. This is the cost for one in a major port like Shanghai though, so building one elsewhere might incur a higher rate due to market, labor and other supply conditions.

Ocean-going containers are a major export to Asia from the US, though in many instances they go back empty. That rotation has varied depending on costs, and they have a finite-number of times to get used before they are scrapped or else sold off to become a storage box or whatever. I'd suspect you would be able to find empty containers at most any port that has an import/export market of any size.

I would assume most containers used for trade in Traveller would not be considered space-rated containers, so one would expect a Traveller-equivalent to be one that was built to the lowest possible TL standard in order for it to be built in as many locations as possible. Standardization is the byword of the Imperium and these would be no exception. Materials wise you'd expect them to be built of similar metal or even composites with enough structural integrity to transport their loads without issue. So they could easily be built at a TL-7 world or greater (TL-6 might be a bit too basic, though not impossible since we had similar ones in that timeframe in history). Being transported in holds means there is no need to build them to stand up to vacuum or exposure to radiation, which keeps their costs and TL down.

For container size I'd expect something similar to modern container standards - a half and a full-sized container (say 5dton and 10dton at 3m height). This simplifies all aspects of transport and handling. 3dton containers would also probably be around, if only for smaller ships and loads. While you may end up having smaller containers, I'd not consider them to be in the same class as the above ones.

Beyond that you'd probably see a mix of grav and wheeled vehicles for unloading. If you have access to grav tech (which any world would), one could attach lifters on top of either end or in the middle to maneuver the container in/out of a ship easily enough. Lifters of this type would be small enough to be carried onboad a ship for loading/unloading at lower-tech ports. Grav tech would free you up from having to restrict yourself to fixed-location container cranes or Mi-jack's on rails. You still may see such tech on lower tech worlds since it should be easily built and maintained locally and still works just fine for rail/trailer loads. For unloading larger ships you may see some form of internal grav-assisted loading mechanisms that would pick up and delivery containers to their storage locations. Even something as simpler as putting retractable wheels in deck plating (planes and air freight loading docks utilize something similar) gives you a large amount of flexibility with for a very low tech solution.

And, I'm sure, there will be new methods developed over the centuries with new forms of tech, just like it's been in our past.

The Starship Operator's Manual has the lowdown on containers.

 

[Vormaerin]

So, perhaps we are just having a jargon issue here. If you read the text accompanying that chart, it says that only the One Cube and the Tonner are used on small freighters like the Free Trader and the Fat Trader. Frankly, those are just a fancy box and largish crate. They are too small to require cranes or other infrastructure. And they are pretty much too small for a commercial user to be sending mixed goods in them. That "tonner" is only a little bit bigger than palletized box that I got riding lawnmower delivered in the other day. They are going to be moved around by forklifts, pallet jacks, or flat carts. Or the fancy high tech equivalents.

They are in a box and a box is a container. But that's still general cargo/breakbulk. They are what is IN a "shipping container". I get five or six shipping containers a day at work and they are full of boxes, crates, and pallets of various things.

So when I was saying that free traders are breakbulk, I mean that they have stacks of 70 "One Cubes" in their hold rather than a 5dton container. Or 10 "Tonners" instead of a 10dton Shipping Container. And the reason for that is twofold. Most importantly, the cargo holds on those ships are not set up for big containers. The entrances are on the side so you can't use a crane to lower things into or out of the hold. And even if you have endless supplies of mini lifters, its going to be awkward to get them in and out once more than a couple are already in place. The other reason is that those low infrastructure ports that rely on free traders aren't going to have the kinds of cranes and mass trucks that make those big containers usable. People are not going to ship full size containers to ports that can't process them (even if locals can make homes out of them and the container owners don't care about the cost).

The SOP does assume that at TL 10 to 12 anti grav is so cheap and ubiquitous folks can routinely use it on low end shipping crates. That does help with the lack of cranes, but not with the design of the starships. Personally, I don't think lifter tech like that would be that commonplace, but that's just my opinion. It seems out of line with the cost of grav vehicles and grav belts. It also means that if the PCs have them for stevedore-ing, they have them for adventuring. And I am not inclined to think that is in the best interest of the game, at least not how I want to run it.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

I mean that they have stacks of 70 "One Cubes" in their hold rather than a 5dton container.

If so then the crane is more or less useless on most PC ships, the loading belt might still have some use. Might just be a conveyor belt running down the centre of the hold that they move things on and it runs them to the hatch where locals can pick them up.

Alternately a single grappling arm would be useful (mounted by the hatch) as due to length it could reach anywhere in the hold and a large distance outside it so it could load onto a variety of waiting trucks or wagons or into a warehouse the ship was landed beside. At 2 tons it is a weight and price savings compared to the crane.

A Ripley style exoskeleton (similar outfit in the 1960s movie The Ambushers with Dean Martin though simpler) would also do the trick especially if they had telecoping legs. Otherwise a simple towmotor.