# passenger and freight table inconsistencies

In other words, it is never profitable (except for jump 1) to have staterooms.
You have to be very stingy with common areas to make it work. With three rolls (high, mid, and basic) they are easier to fill than low berth with only one roll.

In general bigger ships are more profitable, but to fill them you have to use all possible revenue streams. There is a case for passengers, however weak...

A good Steward or other applicable skill can change the odds of filling slots considerably.

High = 5 dT (Stateroom + 1 dT baggage)
Middle = 4 dT (Stateroom)
Basic = 2 dT (Shared stateroom)

You should have some common areas?
Basic is four people per stateroom = 1 Dt?

Thx Gavain! This was what I meant. I add also a few small things:
- high passage consumes 1 ton per 10 passengers so it should be 4.1T of equivalent ton I think... actually the sentence is ambiguous: "it requires 1 stateroom, 1 ton of cargo and 1 steward level per 10 passengers." is it 1 ton per 10 passengers or 1 ton per passenger? If the latter (as you hinted) in this case also middle passage consumes tons of cargo moving it to 4.1 per passenger
- Freight becomes almost as good as middle passage at J6.
- low passage becomes the best already at J3

You should have some common areas?
Basic is four people per stateroom = 1 Dt?
basic use bunk beds: 2T per person, half a stateroom

basic use bunk beds: 2T per person, half a stateroom

OK, was four per stateroom in 2017.

Thx Gavain! This was what I meant. I add also a few small things:
- high passage consumes 1 ton per 10 passengers so it should be 4.1T of equivalent ton I think... actually the sentence is ambiguous: "it requires 1 stateroom, 1 ton of cargo and 1 steward level per 10 passengers." is it 1 ton per 10 passengers or 1 ton per passenger? If the latter (as you hinted) in this case also middle passage consumes tons of cargo moving it to 4.1 per passenger
- Freight becomes almost as good as middle passage at J6.
- low passage becomes the best already at J3
each luxury passenger is allocated 1dton for baggage

each luxury passenger is allocated 1dton for baggage
ah, thx. This makes them and the middle passengers even less appealing. In this case at J6 middle passengers go to 5284.8 and are less efficient than freight (I am referring to the Gavain's table)

ah, thx. This makes them and the middle passengers even less appealing. In this case at J6 middle passengers go to 5284.8 and are less efficient than freight (I am referring to the Gavain's table)
Yes. The best thing to ship for sophont,s is quad occupancy.
The attached image is a screen shot of the person that wrote the trade section for the 2016 CRB.
DO = Double Occupancy
SO = Single Occupancy

#### Attachments

• Updated Passenger Freight Payout Table.PNG
43.9 KB · Views: 8
each luxury passenger is allocated 1dton for baggage
That was already included in my calculations.

Yes. The best thing to ship for sophont,s is quad occupancy.
The attached image is a screen shot of the person that wrote the trade section for the 2016 CRB.
DO = Double Occupancy
SO = Single Occupancy
notice that, at least in the 2022 update, quad occupancy does not exist. Basic passage does double occupancy. Thx for the table!

That was already included in my calculations.
he was replying to me I think. In your calculation it is missing 0.1 tons of luggage for middle passage. Not a lot but enough to tip the balance in favor of freight at J6

Interestingly, there is no indication that there is a premium charged for high passengers using more luxurious accomodation than the standard stateroom a High Stateroom is 6dT and a Luxury Stateroom is 10 dT. Keeping the price fixed would make the High passage in better accommodation the worst yield. I would prorata the cost and add a premium for these types of accommodation.
The luxury stateroom makes you more attractive to high passage passengers.

There is some dispute as to one tonne Terran norm, or fourteen cubic metres.

Same thing with Middle Passage, one and halvish cubic metres, or four to five twenty to twenty five kilogramme suitcases.

The rules have always been poorly suited for really differentiating passenger traffic from glorified freight. People with money are always going to be willing to spend it for better accommodations and food - history has proven this time and again. And freighters aren't going to be able to charge premium high passage prices, so they should all be considered maxxed at middle. True passenger liners, especially larger ones, are going to focus on coddling the wealthy and keeping the rest contented. Think of the golden age of passenger liners crossing the Atlantic in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

Smaller models for J-6 ships would be, as mentioned up-thread, the Concorde. After oil prices shot up in early 2000s, a seat on the Concorde cost you about \$7k in todays' dollars - for a one way trip. Seats were comfortable, but cramped compared to what you got in 1st class on a 747. But the wealthy paid the costs gladly since the 747 moseyed over at about 570 kts and the Concorde around 1,400 kts. Basically the trip's time was cut in half, allowing for limitations with supersonic operations. Today you have subsonic aircraft with small apartments on board that are still profitable even though they aren't always occupied. Starship passenger economics are wonky, at best.

So will there be J-5 and J-6 passenger liners? Yes. Will they be 200 tons? Probably not. And they will only exist between planets that are sufficiently wealthy and populated to justify the very high prices for the tickets. Couriers will exist as well, but again they will normally only be seen in the wealthier portions since they still cost credits sitting in orbit.

Speaking of the Concorde, overall overhead and maintenance costs at technological level fourteen and/or fifteen should be requisitely higher.

Speaking of the Concorde, overall overhead and maintenance costs at technological level fourteen and/or fifteen should be requisitely higher.
Trying to estimate the buying power of credits on different planets is a giant pain in the brain. One would expect outsourcing being alive and well in the future, and shipping lines looking to outsource their maintenance to TL12 and TL 13 planets (or even lower). Parts and training can be shipped in, so you'd save on the potential cost differential with a TL14 or TL15 planet.

I'm happy to ignore trying to figure that particular issue out. Real-life currency conversions and balance of payment economics are painful enough.

I rather doubt any corporation is willing to do technological transfer outside of it's immediate control, unless their cost analysis points to short or medium term net profit.

Also, jump drives are prickly things, and anyone buying a direct six parsec high passage is going to be rich and/or influential, and if they don't arrive at their destination, in tact, that's likely going to cause some unpleasantness for the regional manager.

The luxury stateroom makes you more attractive to high passage passengers.
indeed it does, but it comes at the cost of over twice the space: 11 dT vs 5 dT. Therfore cost per dT per parsec is more than halved, making it a worse return than the basic passage. nobody is going to operate on that basis.
 Parsecs Luxury High Standard 1​ 818​ 1,286​ 1,800​ 2​ 636​ 1,000​ 1,400​ 3​ 636​ 1,000​ 1,400​ 4​ 773​ 1,214​ 1,700​ 5​ 1,091​ 1,714​ 2,400​ 6​ 3,182​ 5,000​ 7,000​

I rather doubt any corporation is willing to do technological transfer outside of it's immediate control, unless their cost analysis points to short or medium term net profit.

Also, jump drives are prickly things, and anyone buying a direct six parsec high passage is going to be rich and/or influential, and if they don't arrive at their destination, in tact, that's likely going to cause some unpleasantness for the regional manager.
No tech changes required, it's basic maintenance.

And it happens all the time today. About half of all aircraft C and D checks are performed by MRO's outside of the G20 nations. People just need the tools and training to do it. Big difference between design and maintenance.

If it's between two planets with the same technological levels, it probably doesn't matter.

But if for some reason it's below fourteen or fifteen, I rather suspect that the shipping line will maintain a facility and crew there to service their Concordes, at the local starport.

Replies
31
Views
653
Replies
74
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
929
Replies
8
Views
551
Replies
11
Views
477