PsiTraveller
Cosmic Mongoose
How old a version of Traveller are we talking? The 1985 HighGuard from GDW has the following. (pg 27)
"Disposable fuel tanks may be added to the ship to increase its range. These
L-Hyd Tanks are fitted to the outside of the ship, and drop away before jump. The
result is more interior space available for cargo and passengers. Such tanks must
be replaced each time they are used, so they are practical only on runs to civilized
areas, or to increase fuel capacity to allow several jumps. L-Hyd tanks are installed
outside the hull, and increase the total tonnage of the ship; drives are reduced in
their efficiency based on the total tonnage of the ship. With tanks retained, efficiency
is decreased, and jump capability is reduced; when the tanks drop away,
tonnage is reduced, and the drive efficiency is increased. L-Hyd Tanks cost
Cr10,000, plus Cr1,000 per ton of fuel carried."
Now granted this does not help in my current example, it is more Drop Tankish in design, but it shows the interest 30 years back in increasing endurance.
Since my last post a couple of hours ago I have been playing around with a redesign of the Armstrong ship. The Core ship is 650 tons. this is the Power plant, M Drives, j Drive, fuel for 32 weeks and 1 Jump 3, bridge and staterooms. Cargo is not included in this list.
So this leaves 350 tons to get fuel for a reduced tonnage Jump and cargo to the 2nd Jump destination.
So Suppose we cut the ship to 800 tons with 200 tons of external cargo mounts. This reduces weapons by 2 hardpoints, basic energy down to 160. We might save a ton of Power Plant or 2.
An 800 ton ship Jumping 3 needs 240 tons of fuel, down to 204 tons dues to the efficient Jump engines. We could re-design the interior to have 120 Tons of Bladder, taking up 120 tons of space when full and 1.2 tons when empty. 30 tons of cargo would be available inside the ship. Outside the ship would be the 65 tons of cargo formerly in the cargo hold. Also on the cargo mounts would be the collapsible containers of fuel, 84 tons worth.
On the second trip the fuel bladder would empty 120 tons into the fuel tank (Since a ship only needs one fuel tank to get into Jump.) The external fuel is then drained into the fuel tank and the collapsing shipping containers brought in and stacked inside the cargo hold in the 120 tons of space. Even if you said it was 30 percent efficient you would need only 30 tons of interior space.
The rest of the cargo could be brought inside as well.
This save 41 tons of fuel for the second Jump, 41 tons of internal space. Yes, there is more moving of material around.
The great thing about this design is that if you were in settled space you could load up to 200 extra tons of cargo outside and move a lot more gear forward. When you got to a Rift you have to leave some behind, but enjoy the logistical flexibility while you can.
"Disposable fuel tanks may be added to the ship to increase its range. These
L-Hyd Tanks are fitted to the outside of the ship, and drop away before jump. The
result is more interior space available for cargo and passengers. Such tanks must
be replaced each time they are used, so they are practical only on runs to civilized
areas, or to increase fuel capacity to allow several jumps. L-Hyd tanks are installed
outside the hull, and increase the total tonnage of the ship; drives are reduced in
their efficiency based on the total tonnage of the ship. With tanks retained, efficiency
is decreased, and jump capability is reduced; when the tanks drop away,
tonnage is reduced, and the drive efficiency is increased. L-Hyd Tanks cost
Cr10,000, plus Cr1,000 per ton of fuel carried."
Now granted this does not help in my current example, it is more Drop Tankish in design, but it shows the interest 30 years back in increasing endurance.
Since my last post a couple of hours ago I have been playing around with a redesign of the Armstrong ship. The Core ship is 650 tons. this is the Power plant, M Drives, j Drive, fuel for 32 weeks and 1 Jump 3, bridge and staterooms. Cargo is not included in this list.
So this leaves 350 tons to get fuel for a reduced tonnage Jump and cargo to the 2nd Jump destination.
So Suppose we cut the ship to 800 tons with 200 tons of external cargo mounts. This reduces weapons by 2 hardpoints, basic energy down to 160. We might save a ton of Power Plant or 2.
An 800 ton ship Jumping 3 needs 240 tons of fuel, down to 204 tons dues to the efficient Jump engines. We could re-design the interior to have 120 Tons of Bladder, taking up 120 tons of space when full and 1.2 tons when empty. 30 tons of cargo would be available inside the ship. Outside the ship would be the 65 tons of cargo formerly in the cargo hold. Also on the cargo mounts would be the collapsible containers of fuel, 84 tons worth.
On the second trip the fuel bladder would empty 120 tons into the fuel tank (Since a ship only needs one fuel tank to get into Jump.) The external fuel is then drained into the fuel tank and the collapsing shipping containers brought in and stacked inside the cargo hold in the 120 tons of space. Even if you said it was 30 percent efficient you would need only 30 tons of interior space.
The rest of the cargo could be brought inside as well.
This save 41 tons of fuel for the second Jump, 41 tons of internal space. Yes, there is more moving of material around.
The great thing about this design is that if you were in settled space you could load up to 200 extra tons of cargo outside and move a lot more gear forward. When you got to a Rift you have to leave some behind, but enjoy the logistical flexibility while you can.