Talking about Trade efficiencies and the like is all well and good, but it isn't the whole picture. For a manufacturing powerhouse to exist, there has to be not only a huge infrastructure in place to produce manufactured goods, there also has to be a vast amount of raw resources available for use by the manufacturing infrastructure.
If Superfreighters do not go to small ports, and we're using the concept that Traveller interstellar trade is akin to nations, then perhaps the biggest issue right off the bat is just how much trade demand there is for various goods, and why.
TL - that not only determines where the world's standards of living are set relative to the prevailing high tech worlds, but also what the infrastructure is set to. But when you start to discuss megafreighters - aren't they a means to an end - distribution of products produced at an economic powerhouse to the rest of the less fortunate regions nearby? If that is the case, shouldn't most of the worlds have access to the highest tech level goods of the closest powerhouse in the region?
As for multi-jump freight costs...
Let's say for the sake of giggles, that you want to ship 100 M1 Garand Rifles. Why M1 Garand? A quick Google of shipping crate stats yielded "They are 18" wide, 49 1/2" long and 13 1/2" deep" for a crate that carried 10 rifles. So, 10 rifles at roughly 7.3 cubic feet per 10 rifles, with one dTon at roughly 500 cubic feet volume, would yield (say, at 90% storage efficiency) some 60 crates per dton. That is 600 rifles. Now, at 1,000 credits per jump - at say, 10 parsecs total distance at 1 parsec per jump, we're looking at a total increase in cost of 10,000 credits.
Dividing 10,000 by 600, and the shipping cost increase on those rifles becomes 16.67 credits per rifle overall. That's using the old Classic Traveller rules of shipping costs per parsec per jump. The CT rules were such that you got 1,000 credits per JUMP - not parsec. That meant then, that a shipping destination that was reachable in 5 jumps, would tack on only 5,000 credits per dton, effectively halving the increased cost per unit item being shipped.
MgT figures the pricing differently, as does GURPS etc. But in the long run, the methodology works the same - figure out how many units are being shipped per dton, divide the entire cost of shipping the dton's worth of goods by units within the dton, and that's the increase in cost.
Would you pay double the cost of a laser Rifle if your world can't manufacture it? Let's say for giggles, that 1 dton of volume can hold HALF the number of Garand rifles for Laser Rifles. That's 300 units per Dton right? Remember, I assumed a 10% loss of volume due to stacking issues, and having to be able to access the crates with handling equipment (forklifts, hands grabbing the ends of boxes via the handles etc). But even so - how much of a shipping cost would it take to make the cost of a laser rifle worth 8,000 credits, double?
Reversing the process I used above to derive the shipping cost per unit...
8000 x 300 = 2.4 Mcr.
Think about that. We'd have to add on 2.4 MCr's worth of shipping cost per dton before the cost of a laser rifle would effectively double - assuming that a laser rifle takes up twice the volume that an M1 Garand requires.
In a GURPS TRAVELLER campaign, or a CLASSIC TRAVELLER campaign, there is the issue of currency differences where a credit on a TL 8 world is not worth the same as a credit on a TL 15 world, so currency exchange rates would also come into play - but you get the gist of what I'm trying to point out here.
What makes shipping in the Traveller Universe the way it is - isn't how effective the ships are at handling the trade volume per se, it is how efficient the costs of transport will appeal to the shippers themselves.
Want to have fun? Go through and identify the "powerhouses" within the Spinward Marches (by powerhouses, those whose population and tech level and resources are sufficient to be deemed local hubs of manufacturing for the lesser worlds nearby). Then assume that for two equal powerhouses (ie TL and population) that they compete with each other to half the distance between them. Map out the territories for those powerhouse worlds just to see what their shipping ranges will be. Finally, figure out what the value assigned to the items being sold are, and determine what the unit cost of shipping per dton has to be for the good(s) in question and add it to the cost of the goods itself. Note too, that when you buy something mail order - they always talk about not only the price of the item you want to purchase, but S & H costs (Shipping and Handling). So, the "and Handling" cost will be a bit more, but that's a function of what the logistics industry will charge to move that "good" for you. Then add in the warehousing costs if any. Add in the wages cost of those who have to pick it up, stock it, or what have you. But - assuming that you can't afford to ship high value things for long distances and state that it is easier to manufacture things locally - sort of makes an assumption that is maybe not 100% true.
Now for the kicker...
Economics.
Let's say for the sake of argument, that for every item that is to be sold, there has to be a buyer. Let's further stipulate that for every buyer, there has to be a means for them to "earn" credits. Sounds simple right? But if you have a factory that is highly automated, you don't NEED workers to work. So, the people you don't hire, don't get paid. Who is going to be able to buy those things that cost money if they don't have jobs to buy those costly things, or can't get paid enough to be able to earn it? For some "third world" countries, that's a problem. They can't buy the goods unless it is DIRT cheap to match their DIRT CHEAP incomes. That may be why you can't sell cars to an Asian country that is largely made up of clusters of islands and fishermen whose catch doesn't generate them huge amounts of excess cash. If an Economic powerhouse is so efficient at manufacturing that neighbors can't compete, they become dependent upon the powerhouse to make those things they'd like.
So, there's a lot of simplification being done, a lot of abstractions involved that people lose sight of what may be involved in a Traveller style economy. I just chose the M1 Garand as an example. BIC pens require certain relatively high precision manufacturing techniques not present on a world that is stuck with medieval style technology. If BIC pens were sold at a cheap enough price that people would love them on a Medieval tech world - that puts a few ink manufacturers out of business on that medieval style world. It would also likely render the quills used as pens largely pointless. And who is going to put up a BIC pen competitor factory if the cost to build the manufacturing equipment makes the cost of operating the machinery and supplying it with raw materials - can STILL be undercut by the Powerhouse some 12 parsecs away at half the price even after transportation costs are factored in?
That brings me back to the point I made earlier: For a buyer to buy goods, they have to have money to buy with. The trade partner has to have something the powerhouse wants. If the backwater trade partner has neither those things the powerhouse wants, nor can afford what the powerhouse charges for its goods - then there won't be a trade partnership.
So, that's my thoughts on the matter. Certain trade assumptions on how far certain goods can be transported before the goods are not considered to be economically viable - needs to be revised. How many units per Cubic Foot can you have of medicine? If you can have 2 doses of medicine per cubic inch, and carry about 1.4 million doses per dton - adding 10 MCr shipping cost for the dTon merely adds 7.15 credit surcharge to the value of ONE dose of medicine.
How far do you have to ship something to incur a 10 MCr shipping cost per dTon?
If Superfreighters do not go to small ports, and we're using the concept that Traveller interstellar trade is akin to nations, then perhaps the biggest issue right off the bat is just how much trade demand there is for various goods, and why.
TL - that not only determines where the world's standards of living are set relative to the prevailing high tech worlds, but also what the infrastructure is set to. But when you start to discuss megafreighters - aren't they a means to an end - distribution of products produced at an economic powerhouse to the rest of the less fortunate regions nearby? If that is the case, shouldn't most of the worlds have access to the highest tech level goods of the closest powerhouse in the region?
As for multi-jump freight costs...
Let's say for the sake of giggles, that you want to ship 100 M1 Garand Rifles. Why M1 Garand? A quick Google of shipping crate stats yielded "They are 18" wide, 49 1/2" long and 13 1/2" deep" for a crate that carried 10 rifles. So, 10 rifles at roughly 7.3 cubic feet per 10 rifles, with one dTon at roughly 500 cubic feet volume, would yield (say, at 90% storage efficiency) some 60 crates per dton. That is 600 rifles. Now, at 1,000 credits per jump - at say, 10 parsecs total distance at 1 parsec per jump, we're looking at a total increase in cost of 10,000 credits.
Dividing 10,000 by 600, and the shipping cost increase on those rifles becomes 16.67 credits per rifle overall. That's using the old Classic Traveller rules of shipping costs per parsec per jump. The CT rules were such that you got 1,000 credits per JUMP - not parsec. That meant then, that a shipping destination that was reachable in 5 jumps, would tack on only 5,000 credits per dton, effectively halving the increased cost per unit item being shipped.
MgT figures the pricing differently, as does GURPS etc. But in the long run, the methodology works the same - figure out how many units are being shipped per dton, divide the entire cost of shipping the dton's worth of goods by units within the dton, and that's the increase in cost.
Would you pay double the cost of a laser Rifle if your world can't manufacture it? Let's say for giggles, that 1 dton of volume can hold HALF the number of Garand rifles for Laser Rifles. That's 300 units per Dton right? Remember, I assumed a 10% loss of volume due to stacking issues, and having to be able to access the crates with handling equipment (forklifts, hands grabbing the ends of boxes via the handles etc). But even so - how much of a shipping cost would it take to make the cost of a laser rifle worth 8,000 credits, double?
Reversing the process I used above to derive the shipping cost per unit...
8000 x 300 = 2.4 Mcr.
Think about that. We'd have to add on 2.4 MCr's worth of shipping cost per dton before the cost of a laser rifle would effectively double - assuming that a laser rifle takes up twice the volume that an M1 Garand requires.
In a GURPS TRAVELLER campaign, or a CLASSIC TRAVELLER campaign, there is the issue of currency differences where a credit on a TL 8 world is not worth the same as a credit on a TL 15 world, so currency exchange rates would also come into play - but you get the gist of what I'm trying to point out here.
What makes shipping in the Traveller Universe the way it is - isn't how effective the ships are at handling the trade volume per se, it is how efficient the costs of transport will appeal to the shippers themselves.
Want to have fun? Go through and identify the "powerhouses" within the Spinward Marches (by powerhouses, those whose population and tech level and resources are sufficient to be deemed local hubs of manufacturing for the lesser worlds nearby). Then assume that for two equal powerhouses (ie TL and population) that they compete with each other to half the distance between them. Map out the territories for those powerhouse worlds just to see what their shipping ranges will be. Finally, figure out what the value assigned to the items being sold are, and determine what the unit cost of shipping per dton has to be for the good(s) in question and add it to the cost of the goods itself. Note too, that when you buy something mail order - they always talk about not only the price of the item you want to purchase, but S & H costs (Shipping and Handling). So, the "and Handling" cost will be a bit more, but that's a function of what the logistics industry will charge to move that "good" for you. Then add in the warehousing costs if any. Add in the wages cost of those who have to pick it up, stock it, or what have you. But - assuming that you can't afford to ship high value things for long distances and state that it is easier to manufacture things locally - sort of makes an assumption that is maybe not 100% true.
Now for the kicker...
Economics.
Let's say for the sake of argument, that for every item that is to be sold, there has to be a buyer. Let's further stipulate that for every buyer, there has to be a means for them to "earn" credits. Sounds simple right? But if you have a factory that is highly automated, you don't NEED workers to work. So, the people you don't hire, don't get paid. Who is going to be able to buy those things that cost money if they don't have jobs to buy those costly things, or can't get paid enough to be able to earn it? For some "third world" countries, that's a problem. They can't buy the goods unless it is DIRT cheap to match their DIRT CHEAP incomes. That may be why you can't sell cars to an Asian country that is largely made up of clusters of islands and fishermen whose catch doesn't generate them huge amounts of excess cash. If an Economic powerhouse is so efficient at manufacturing that neighbors can't compete, they become dependent upon the powerhouse to make those things they'd like.
So, there's a lot of simplification being done, a lot of abstractions involved that people lose sight of what may be involved in a Traveller style economy. I just chose the M1 Garand as an example. BIC pens require certain relatively high precision manufacturing techniques not present on a world that is stuck with medieval style technology. If BIC pens were sold at a cheap enough price that people would love them on a Medieval tech world - that puts a few ink manufacturers out of business on that medieval style world. It would also likely render the quills used as pens largely pointless. And who is going to put up a BIC pen competitor factory if the cost to build the manufacturing equipment makes the cost of operating the machinery and supplying it with raw materials - can STILL be undercut by the Powerhouse some 12 parsecs away at half the price even after transportation costs are factored in?
That brings me back to the point I made earlier: For a buyer to buy goods, they have to have money to buy with. The trade partner has to have something the powerhouse wants. If the backwater trade partner has neither those things the powerhouse wants, nor can afford what the powerhouse charges for its goods - then there won't be a trade partnership.
So, that's my thoughts on the matter. Certain trade assumptions on how far certain goods can be transported before the goods are not considered to be economically viable - needs to be revised. How many units per Cubic Foot can you have of medicine? If you can have 2 doses of medicine per cubic inch, and carry about 1.4 million doses per dton - adding 10 MCr shipping cost for the dTon merely adds 7.15 credit surcharge to the value of ONE dose of medicine.
How far do you have to ship something to incur a 10 MCr shipping cost per dTon?
