Ship cost reduction as TL increases?

The question is would the original Model T factory be able to sell them in the modern market place for more than the modern factory can.

The question was phrased as surely a TL11 ship should be cheaper to buy from a TL15 shipyard. The question is actually cheaper than what? Not cheaper than a TL11 shipyard can sell the same ship for. No-one would buy it at the TL11 price if you could buy the same one from the TL15 yard for less.

It is the higher TL manufacturer that sets the price everyone else has to chase.

There is actually a real modern analogy to this. Morris minors used to be made in the UK and at the time were no less outdated than any other production car. They were exported to India and were very popular. When they fell from favour in Europe the equipment was sold to Indian factories so that they could continue to support their market which was still strong. Current Morris Minor enthusiasts in the UK source their spares from Indian factories for less than modern part manufacturers charge for equivalent parts. Many this drive this price difference but the lack of technology base in some parts of India drives costs down not up.

The comparison with historic things is flawed because it does not recognise that the historic version and the current version need to be selling in the same modern market place. Some people may buy at a premium for "hand-made" or niche market but that is not the same as made for mass markets using obsolete manufacturing equipment. The historic factory was not using obsolete equipment it was using contemporary stuff but if it were manufacturing in the modern era it would be either using modern equipment or to force the TL analogy it would be buying in obsolete manufacturing equipment (at significantly lower cost of ownership). With lower overheads it can lower its price to match that of the Higher tech factory.

The flawed assumption is that TL11 shipyard is making it for the "right price" and that includes all it's inefficiencies. In fact the price is what the market will bear regardless who makes it.
Take the TL-11 ship built in a cutting-edge factory on the TL-11 world.

Take the TL-11 ship's capabilities and redesign it at TL-15 and build it at TL-15 on a TL-15 world with a TL-15 Class-A shipyard.

Both ships (TL-11 and TL-15) have the exact same capabilities (M-Drive, J-Drive, Power Output, etc)

The TL-15 ship will either be cheaper or simply have more cargo space available and therefore be more efficient.
 
Take the TL-11 ship built in a cutting-edge factory on the TL-11 world.

Take the TL-11 ship's capabilities and redesign it at TL-15 and build it at TL-15 on a TL-15 world with a TL-15 Class-A shipyard.

Both ships (TL-11 and TL-15) have the exact same capabilities (M-Drive, J-Drive, Power Output, etc)

The TL-15 ship will either be cheaper or simply have more cargo space available and therefore be more efficient.
It isn't the same ship then. If it is using TL11 components (rather than TL15 components that provide the same capabilities) then where is the cost reduction coming from.

I can see an argument for making high tech stuff more expensive on a low tech planet if availability is an issue (and we have that rule already in CSC where we can pay double or triple price for something that is otherwise unavailable to increase the chance of sourcing it). Given a Starship is by definition fairly mobile however, even for a world 10 parsecs away it is only going to cost fuel and maintenance to deliver it there from the Tl15 yard, the price differential is going to be marginal at best.
 
MasterGwydion said:
The other option is to build a car that looks like a Model T, but has been completely redesigned to be built with 2025 technologies using the original capabilities of the Model T to determine which modern best fit with that design plan. This would not be cheaper, but the components would almost all be smaller.

I believe this to be the point of the OP. I could be wrong though. :P

Take the TL-11 ship built in a cutting-edge factory on the TL-11 world.

Take the TL-11 ship's capabilities and redesign it at TL-15 and build it at TL-15 on a TL-15 world with a TL-15 Class-A shipyard.

Both ships (TL-11 and TL-15) have the exact same capabilities (M-Drive, J-Drive, Power Output, etc)

The TL-15 ship will either be cheaper or simply have more cargo space available and therefore be more efficient.

Yes. That is what I am saying.

If you take the CAPABILITIES of a TL11 ship (i.e. how far can it jump, what is the G rating of the manoeuvre drives, what is the power output of the power plant) and reproduce those capabilities at TL15, then the systems to produce those same outputs should be smaller and/or cheaper.

If they are smaller, then there would be more room for cargo or other systems.

However,

As I think about this, there is another factor I had not considered... serviceability. EDIT: It seems I posted at the same time as Sigtrygg.

I am currently running a campaign in the Hinterworlds Sector. The general tech level there is low. The area we are playing in, there are mostly TL9 and TL10 worlds. While a TL15 engine might be awesome and compact, that is not much use to you if it has a breakdown 14 jumps from the nearest TL15 shipyard.

Having a lower TL engine does give you more options to get it fixed.

- Kerry
 
I am currently running a campaign in the Hinterworlds Sector. The general tech level there is low. The area we are playing in, there are mostly TL9 and TL10 worlds. While a TL15 engine might be awesome and compact, that is not much use to you if it has a breakdown 14 jumps from the nearest TL15 shipyard.

Having a lower TL engine does give you more options to get it fixed.

- Kerry
Not just when it breaks down, every monthly maintenance activity would need to be at a TL15 yard.

This where you could use the CSC availability rule. You might get your maintenance covered on any particular month for base price, but roll bad on the availability table and you might have to pay double or triple to have the parts when you need them or be forced to skip maintenance for the month and hope you find them next time.
 
Not just when it breaks down, every monthly maintenance activity would need to be at a TL15 yard.

This where you could use the CSC availability rule. You might get your maintenance covered on any particular month for base price, but roll bad on the availability table and you might have to pay double or triple to have the parts when you need them or be forced to skip maintenance for the month and hope you find them next time.
Agreed.

I am in the process of writing up a ship for TAS that is a TL10 2000-dTon freighter. It isn't very high tech, but it can be built locally and most importantly maintained and repaired locally.

phavoc said:
The other thing, as mentioned before, a starship is much more complex than a rifle (or even an ME-262). Maybe a better comparison would be the ubiquitous Liberty ship from WW2. Standardization of the process and training the crews to build using assembly line processes dropped the average build time from 230 days to just 42. Now that doesn't include the fitting out process, just time from laying the keel to launch. Ironically the engine selected for the Liberty ship was an obsolete one and chosen specifically because it WAS obsolete and easier to build than more modern ones. And it was built using pre-fab efforts rather than from the ground up.

To use the Liberty ship example, choosing an obsolete engine might be a wise choice:

1) They are readily available and cheap
2) The existing community knows how to operate and maintain them with their eyes closed
3) Parts are commonly available, and/or easily manufactured in a pinch

- Kerry
 
To use the Liberty ship example, choosing an obsolete engine might be a wise choice:

1) They are readily available and cheap
2) The existing community knows how to operate and maintain them with their eyes closed
3) Parts are commonly available, and/or easily manufactured in a pinch

- Kerry
Did you see the TED talk about an organisation that was supplying incubators to the third world. Usually the high tech marvels died within a year as no-one could maintain them.

Some bright spark developed an incubator (NeoNature) that used car parts instead of the complex stuff that modern hospitals considered necessary. The logic was that almost no third world city let alone town would carry spare air filters for an incubator. Even a village might have an air filter for a car. Low tech in this case was better tech.
 
A quick review of the Wikipedia page for Liberty Ships has some relevant phrases:

"engine of outdated but reliable design"
"was cheap to build and cheap to run"
"The design was modified...to make it even quicker and cheaper to build."

"Therefore, a[n]...engine, of obsolete design, was selected to power Liberty ships because it was cheaper and easier to build in the numbers required for the Liberty ship program, and because more companies could manufacture it. Eighteen different companies eventually built the engine. It had the additional advantage of ruggedness, simplicity and familiarity to seamen. Parts manufactured by one company were interchangeable with those made by another, and the openness of its design made most of its moving parts easy to see, access, and oil."

"The ships were made assembly-line style, from prefabricated sections. In 1943 three Liberty ships were completed daily."
 
It usually comes down to return on investment.

If operating costs is the primary expense, whether labour or fuel, you'll buy spacecraft that are more automated, and/or greener.
 
It isn't the same ship then. If it is using TL11 components (rather than TL15 components that provide the same capabilities) then where is the cost reduction coming from.

I can see an argument for making high tech stuff more expensive on a low tech planet if availability is an issue (and we have that rule already in CSC where we can pay double or triple price for something that is otherwise unavailable to increase the chance of sourcing it). Given a Starship is by definition fairly mobile however, even for a world 10 parsecs away it is only going to cost fuel and maintenance to deliver it there from the Tl15 yard, the price differential is going to be marginal at best.
Electronics drop in price and or size at each tech level.
There is no reason to believe that the electronics on a ship would be any different.
So while not everything on a ship could benefit from TL efficiencies, many systems could.
At this point it is each individual GM doing the decision making on that.
Fabricators change the game.
 
Electronics drop in price and or size at each tech level.
There is no reason to believe that the electronics on a ship would be any different.
So while not everything on a ship could benefit from TL efficiencies, many systems could.
At this point it is each individual GM doing the decision making on that.
Fabricators change the game.
And I think this is a core issue with the idea that as TLs increase things get cheaper with no downside. We don't have any examples of a set of countries that actually operate at vastly different TLs but that can trade freely with one another where there is massive disparity in prices (purely due to technology).

If a TL15 computer system has the exactly the same capabilities as a TL11 system why should it be cheaper. It is functionally equivalent. In reality computers are cheaper because of the consumer electronics boom and the latest model is cheaper than the latest model from 10 years ago, that model from 10 years ago is also cheaper than it was 10 years ago and also cheaper than the latest model. The relative price hasn't changed but the frame of reference has.

A 1930's radio uses valves. If you want to make a retro 1930's radio you can't do it with transistors or an integrated circuit. Those are the things that made a 1960's radio cheaper and smaller and the 2000's radio smaller and cheaper still. If make it with new technology it isn't 1930's technology made with 21st century technology it is just 21st century technology reskinned to make it look old. To actually make a 1930's radio with modern technology it would need to use valves (but those valves might be made with modern manufacturing tooling).

The argument being used here is if a TL15 made a TL11 component, but it isn't TL11 because it uses TL15 technology.

When we talk about a TL8 power plant it has different properties to a TL12 power plant. A TL15 planet will not make a TL15 plant with the same properties as a TL8 plant but out of TL15 materials and technology as the thing that defines the TL8 plant is the technology and the materials. If you make a TL8 fusion plant, it puts out 15 power per ton and costs MCr0.5. If it can put out 15 power per ton it is by definition TL12 and a TL12 plant costs MCr1 per ton., regardless of the TL of the planet where it is manufactured.
 
Your cell phone used to cost several million dollars and took up an entire room, then a large closet. Now it fits in your pocket and everyone can afford one.
Radios used to take up an entire cabinet. Then a shelf. Now one fits in your cell phone alongside the equivalent of an 80's Cray supercomputer.
We HAVE real world examples.
And while they were not trading, Berlin Wall era Russian and western electronics still prove the point.

When we are talking about building a ship with TL 12 characteristics in a TL15 setting, we are not talking about remaking vacuum tubes for a 1940's radio. We are talking about not including the TL 15 bells and whistles, and fabricating the components using cheaper materials. If you want that to cost the same IYTU, go for it.
"You Can't" does nothing to further the conversation, when plainly, electronics tech gets cheaper as TL's advance for a product delivering outdated performance when 3D Printer like devices spit out whatever designs you put in them. Cheaply. Large portions of a starship are filled with such electronics. Constructing with the mindset of cheap, and yet not disposable, unlike our current paradigm, results in a decidedly different product.
 
Last edited:
Your cell phone used to cost several million dollars and took up an entire room, then a large closet. Now it fits in your pocket and everyone can afford one.
Radios used to take up an entire cabinet. Then a shelf. Now one fits in your cell phone alongside the equivalent of an 80's Cray supercomputer.
We HAVE real world examples.
And while they were not trading, Berlin Wall era Russian and western electronics still prove the point.
Yes, as I stated myself radios became smaller and cheaper. Like your examples these are not separated by just technology they are also separated by time. We were talking about availability of a product in a concurrent universe.

The lack of trading is exactly the point I have been trying to make. If Berlin Wall Russia was able to buy western electronics that performed better or cheaper than theirs they would have done and not wasted resource producing their own inferior ones.
When we are talking about building a ship with TL 12 characteristics in a TL15 setting, we are not talking about remaking vacuum tubes for a 1940's radio. We are talking about not including the TL 15 bells and whistles, and fabricating the components using cheaper materials. If you want that to cost the same IYTU, go for it.
I think there is already a mechanism to reflect efficiencies of high TL and that is the advantages/disadvantages. I do not see that cost reduction without disadvantage is possible when goods can be traded freely as goods will gravitate to the price cheapest economically possible "the law of one price".
"You Can't" does nothing to further the conversation,
I stand by the assertion that a 1930's radio made with modern components is categorically not a 1930's radio.
when plainly, electronics tech gets cheaper as TL's advance for a product delivering outdated performance when 3D Printer like devices spit out whatever designs you put in them. Cheaply. Large portions of a starship are filled with such electronics. Constructing with the mindset of cheap, and yet not disposable, unlike our current paradigm, results in a decidedly different product.
I am not disagreeing that higher TL stuff in real life can do more for less, but that isn't the way Traveller prices things. Higher TL things are usually more capable and usually cost more. Pricing in the Traveller future seems to be based on what the market will bear, with more capable things being more expensive, rather than a production cost vs profit dynamic.
 
Not just when it breaks down, every monthly maintenance activity would need to be at a TL15 yard.

This where you could use the CSC availability rule. You might get your maintenance covered on any particular month for base price, but roll bad on the availability table and you might have to pay double or triple to have the parts when you need them or be forced to skip maintenance for the month and hope you find them next time.
Except as of the SOM, you no longer need shipyards to perform maintenance, you just have to carry sufficient Supply Units and/or Spare Parts.
 
And I think this is a core issue with the idea that as TLs increase things get cheaper with no downside. We don't have any examples of a set of countries that actually operate at vastly different TLs but that can trade freely with one another where there is massive disparity in prices (purely due to technology).

If a TL15 computer system has the exactly the same capabilities as a TL11 system why should it be cheaper. It is functionally equivalent. In reality computers are cheaper because of the consumer electronics boom and the latest model is cheaper than the latest model from 10 years ago, that model from 10 years ago is also cheaper than it was 10 years ago and also cheaper than the latest model. The relative price hasn't changed but the frame of reference has.

A 1930's radio uses valves. If you want to make a retro 1930's radio you can't do it with transistors or an integrated circuit. Those are the things that made a 1960's radio cheaper and smaller and the 2000's radio smaller and cheaper still. If make it with new technology it isn't 1930's technology made with 21st century technology it is just 21st century technology reskinned to make it look old. To actually make a 1930's radio with modern technology it would need to use valves (but those valves might be made with modern manufacturing tooling).

The argument being used here is if a TL15 made a TL11 component, but it isn't TL11 because it uses TL15 technology.

When we talk about a TL8 power plant it has different properties to a TL12 power plant. A TL15 planet will not make a TL15 plant with the same properties as a TL8 plant but out of TL15 materials and technology as the thing that defines the TL8 plant is the technology and the materials. If you make a TL8 fusion plant, it puts out 15 power per ton and costs MCr0.5. If it can put out 15 power per ton it is by definition TL12 and a TL12 plant costs MCr1 per ton., regardless of the TL of the planet where it is manufactured.
Same capabilities, not same technology. 88 Power Points is 88 Power Points regardless of TL. If the TL-11 ship calls for 88 Power Points, you put a TL-15 Power Plant in it that puts out 88 Power Points. Easy. TL-11 capabilities using TL-15 technology. Don't over complicate it guys.
 
If we take the example of electronics, for a given performance, we can make components that are smaller and cheaper than previously, but they are more sophisticated, and in relative terms, the industrial tooling and institutional knowledge costs more.

This sort of plateaus, using Traveller, specifically Mongosian, mechanics, three technological levels later.
 
I stand by the assertion that a 1930's radio made with modern components is categorically not a 1930's radio.
Who cares that it is not a 1930's radio?
We are looking for a radio with the capabilities and form of a 1930's radio that is cheaper than a 1930's radio.
With a 3d printing fabricator, that is more than achievable.
 
I am not disagreeing that higher TL stuff in real life can do more for less, but that isn't the way Traveller prices things. Higher TL things are usually more capable and usually cost more. Pricing in the Traveller future seems to be based on what the market will bear, with more capable things being more expensive, rather than a production cost vs profit dynamic.
That is not a part of the in game economics... yet. Doesn't mean GM's cannot institute that, especially since the rulebook gives exactly that a green light.
 
One way to look at it is that the prices in the books are already adjusted for TL15 worlds. A Jump-2 TL12 drive built at a TL12 shipyard is actually very different from a TL12 Jump-2 drive built at a TL15 shipyard, but the price is the same because the performance is the same.
 
Back
Top