passenger and freight table inconsistencies

[Arkathan]

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​

From a meta gaming standpoint, no, they would not. However, NPC ships stay in business through reputation and repeat customers with subsidized ships on fixed, circuitous routes. Player characters do not get reliable word of mouth for circuitous routes, since player characters are easily bored/distracted and deviate from the established route with great frequency. Charter trips are more along their lines, where you can charge extra.

 

[phavoc]

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.

There are real-world precedents for when aircraft have broken down in some out-of-the-way location, and they had to ship in both the spares and techs to do the work.

However, it's easy enough to have it set up and cover that sort of thing. If they can do C/D checks outside of the US/Western Europe, a TL12 planet can easily do maintenance on a TL 15 ship - so long as they have the parts and training. I could give a TL-5 infantryman a TL-11 gauss rifle and with a little training he's able to use it just fine to kill an (unarmored) TL-15 citizen.

 

[Condottiere]

Just in time inventory, with almost instantaneous feedback.

We don't really address if the complexity of technology requires specialized training, and therefore skill subcategories, besides pressing the correct buttons.

Certification seems the norm at this moment in time, but how that applies to Buck Rogers in the Fifty Seventh Century?

 

[Ol'Weedy]

One thing nobody seems to have included in their calculations (i didn't back read everything) is time, wasted time in particular. Every one of those J1's is going to need at least 2 extra days to get to a refueling sight, whether it be a high-port or gas giant, and then back to a safe jump limit. Add a day perhaps, if it's a down-port. Add time looking for new passengers and cargo. Fuel has already been discussed, but that's 2-3 extra days life support per parsec.
Sure the J6 ship has to pay those costs too, but he it can do the round trip 3 times, in the same period, assuming equal M-drives for inter-system.

 

[Vormaerin]

I think that is a misunderstanding of the situation. Yes, a J6 ship has the fuel to make 6 Jump 1s. But refueling time isn't really a problem, unless you are skimming or relying on fuel processing of unrefined fuel. You are going to have to make the Jump point to base round trip to drop off the cargo and passengers whether you are refueling or not. And, in most cases, a decently run starport can refuel you in the time you unload existing cargo and load in new cargo.

And the big problem is...how much less cargo you can carry per trip. Jump 6 requires 75% of the ship. (60% for fuel, 15% for the engines) Jump 1 requires 12.5% of the ship (there's also a flat 5 tons on top of that, plus the potential for needing a larger power plant). Given that most freighters are around 50% cargo, if you jump from 12.5% to 75%, you don't have any cargo space left... So you can make a lot of trips carrying basically nothing.

 

[Condottiere]

Something has to pay for capital outlay, mortgage, running costs, and annual maintenance.

So it would have to be the payload, unless someone is subsidizing the route.