Ship Valuation (aka Breaking Even)

[Greysword]

Hi Everyone,

First post here, so I wanted to share something I've been working on (before I start asking the hard questions later :wink: ).

I'm new to Traveller, and I've been struck with the greatness of this game. I'm so sad I did start back int he 1980's, when this was available!

Sorrow aside, I've been looking at the cost of character starships, and boy... they sure are expensive! Like crazy untenable expensive. I was curious as to how much of a derelict a young trader might need to get in order to actually break even (and make a little coin on the side). Thus, I created a spreadsheet to compare the Free Trader and the Far Trader, as outlined in the Mongoose Traveller 2e Core Rulebook.

What I found was:

1) Tramp freighters are profitable if they are fully loaded (with cargo and passengers) and on the routes that maximize their Jump numbers (1 parsec/run for Free Traders and 2 parsecs per run for Far Traders).

2) Running on a less efficient route is costly. Far Traders that only do one-parsec jumps are loosing the bonus cash that makes up for the lower capacity, and Free Traders making a two-parsec run are not making enough round trips to be viable.

3) Reducing the number of passengers quickly takes away a large portion of the revenue, and running with just cargo is not really viable. Guess a captain needs to put up with those pesky passengers, even if they are introverted.


For instance, the below example has 2 Ship Shares and MCr1 for a turret baked into the post discount cost. In order to be viable, the Far Trader needs a 75% Old Ship discount and the Free Trader is mostly viable at a 50% discount.


Far Trader

Original ship Price: 52,240,500
Purchase Price: 12,060,125
Original Mortgage: 217,669
Purchased Mortgage: 50,251
Maintenance (annual): 52,241
Fuel (tons): 41

% Old Ship Discount: 75%
Total Ship Savings: 40,180,375
% Total Savings: 77%


1 Parsec Run (in Cr)

Valuation (with full load)
Operating Revenue: 220,689
Operating Expenses: 94,870
Profit \ (Deficit): 125,819

Valuation (with cargo & low berth only)
Operating Revenue: 79,329
Operating Expenses: 70,870
Profit \ (Deficit): 8,459

Valuation (with cargo only)
Operating Revenue: 71,349
Operating Expenses: 70,270
Profit \ (Deficit): 1,079


2 Parsec Run (in Cr)

Valuation (with full load)
Operating Revenue: 330,129
Operating Expenses: 94,870
Profit \ (Deficit): 235,259

Valuation (with cargo & low berth only)
Operating Revenue: 159,129
Operating Expenses: 70,870
Profit \ (Deficit): 88,259

Valuation (with cargo only)
Operating Revenue: 144,309
Operating Expenses: 70,270
Profit \ (Deficit): 74,039



Free Trader

Original ship Price: 45,342,000
Purchase Price: 21,671,000
Original Mortgage: 188,925
Purchased Mortgage: 90,296
Maintenance (annual): 45,342
Fuel (tons): 21

% Old Ship Discount: 50%
Total Ship Savings: 23,671,000
% Total Savings: 52%


1 Parsec Run (in Cr)

Valuation (with full load)
Operating Revenue: 237,264
Operating Expenses: 74,029
Profit \ (Deficit): 163,236

Valuation (with cargo & low berth only)
Operating Revenue: 95,904
Operating Expenses: 50,029
Profit \ (Deficit): 45,876

Valuation (with cargo only)
Operating Revenue: 69,304
Operating Expenses: 48,029
Profit \ (Deficit): 21,276


2 Parsec Run (in Cr)

Valuation (with full load)
Operating Revenue: 147,584
Operating Expenses: 74,029
Profit \ (Deficit) 73,556

Valuation (with cargo & low berth only)
Operating Revenue: 62,084
Operating Expenses: 50,029
Profit \ (Deficit): 12,056

Valuation (with cargo only)
Operating Revenue: 37,384
Operating Expenses: 48,029
Profit \ (Deficit): (10,644)


A link to the spreadsheet is here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rmArSSyamTEclsysiPT0xyVDzFTN9TsOnh20uae2kh4/edit?usp=sharing

Feel free to use it as desired. Please note that this is a public spreadsheet, so if you make changes, it will also change other people's view. I recommend downloading it or making a copy for yourself if you want any changes to last more than a few minutes. As for me, I have the original with other figures in it, so feel free to play!

Anyway, I wanted to share, in case any new (or veteran) players could use something like this, and to bring something to the group before I start taking. :mrgreen:

Have fun!

- Chris

 

[Sigtrygg]

If you had started with the 77 edition then you would understand the purpose of the trade system as originally intended.

It was a game within a game that modelled the operations of small tramp traders. The basic trading rules could lead to break even if the die rolls were favourable. The trick to hetting ahead ws to dabble in speculative trade, if you were lucky enough to get a few good cargos then you could build up quite an operating fund.

But it is also part of a role playing game. The referee would throw a spanner in the works from time to time that would cost the trader money forceing the crew to make money by seeking out adventure...

 

[Condottiere]

Barring a black swan event.

 

[Reynard]

I've always assumed Traveller is meant to encourage player characters to take chances on side adventures that will bring in big rewards and renown. Let the timid traders stick to routine and safe routes. That's how a group become legendary to every other spacer and merchants as well as very well off.

Can you imagine Han and Chewy's lives if they only stuck with spaceports to hopefully sell high and buy low day after day after day never taking a chance for all those decades.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

What I found was:

1) Tramp freighters are profitable if they are fully loaded (with cargo and passengers) and on the routes that maximize their Jump numbers (1 parsec/run for Free Traders and 2 parsecs per run for Far Traders).

Some random comments:

I have some difficulty following your spreadsheet. I generally put it per jump (~two weeks), e.g. Free Trader:

You have a very non-standard crew?

You don't need to buy refined fuel when the ship has a fuel processors.

I don't follow life support + additional life support? If you are running double occupancy (not standard commercial practice), it's Cr 1000 per stateroom (regardless of use) + Cr 1000 per person.

Both the Free and Far Trader have 10 staterooms, each crew member and passenger requires one stateroom each. With a crew of five, you can have five passengers.

On the standard schedule you can jump 25 times per year. ( 52 weeks - 2 weeks maintenance ) / 2 = 25.

A two parsec run in a free trader would only take three weeks? One week in port to find payload, one week jump, less than a day to refuel, one week jump.

You don't need to hire (and pay) a broker to find freight or passengers. That is only specified to help find speculative cargo.

 

[Greysword]

Thanks everyone!

So, the purpose of the game is to not break even under standard rules. Rather, the deficit is to force GM engagement looking for the big score? Sounds... dangerous

Some random comments:

I have some difficulty following your spreadsheet. I generally put it per jump (~two weeks), e.g. Free Trader:

On the standard schedule you can jump 25 times per year. ( 52 weeks - 2 weeks maintenance ) / 2 = 25.

A two parsec run in a free trader would only take three weeks? One week in port to find payload, one week jump, less than a day to refuel, one week jump.

Sorry. I tried to make the revenue figures per month, since that's how the bills are outlined. Assuming four weeks\month, that means 2 runs per month normally. However if the Free Trader takes a job for a two sector jump, they will only get one trip per month (generally, since as you pointed out it's 3 weeks).

I also seemed to try too many scenarios at once (various number of jumps with different cargo\passenger configurations for each). This muddied the waters, so to say.

In matching your figures to mine (using Mongoose Traveller 2e core rulebook), it seems I'm largely off on Life Support:

- Cr 92.700\month mortgage means the final sale price was MCr 22,248. With the down payment of MCr 9,3, the initial sale price was MCr 31,548, which is a 70% discount from the book price of MCr 45,342. Was this the "new price" you used or was the ship cheaper to start?

- I thought annual maintenance was 0.1% of the ship price when it was new. Is this in error?

You have a very non-standard crew?

- I altered the salaries to match a trial character I made up (rolled an Engineer\Astrogator). Thus, I assume the PC would hire a Pilot\Astrogator, Medic\Steward, and Marine\Gunner, with the secondary skill being 50% the listed salary. This can be anything, based on the PCs available and\or the ability of the ship's owner to fill some of the roles.

You don't need to buy refined fuel when the ship has a fuel processors.

- I calculated annual fuel costs at 21tons x Cr 500\ton x 26 fuel ups\year. Monthly divides this by 12. This is basically the same as yours at Cr100 \fuel-up. I assumed cheap fuel was in less advanced starports; and Type A, B and C ports would not have unrefined available.

I don't follow life support + additional life support? If you are running double occupancy (not standard commercial practice), it's Cr 1000 per stateroom (regardless of use) + Cr 1000 per person.

Both the Free and Far Trader have 10 staterooms, each crew member and passenger requires one stateroom each. With a crew of five, you can have five passengers.

- Life Support was calculated with four 1-person staterooms for the crew (4 x Cr1000) plus six double passenger staterooms (6 x Cr2000) plus 20 low berths (20 x Cr100). Then I added the Additional Life Support costs at (16 x Cr1000) for 12 passengers and 4 crew. Was this in error? How does Standard vs High passage work?

You don't need to hire (and pay) a broker to find freight or passengers. That is only specified to help find speculative cargo.

Oh, ok. I thought a Broker was needed for any transaction. So freighter captains can work this out without the Broker skill normally? Is there that much demand for passenger\cargo service?

I don't really have a game to play in. I'm just learning it to enjoy the system. Maybe someday, I'll GM a game.

Thanks again for your and everyone's help! I can remove the spreadsheet if you think it's confusing for new comers.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I tried to make the revenue figures per month, since that's how the bills are outlined. Assuming four weeks\month, that means 2 runs per month normally. However if the Free Trader takes a job for a two sector jump, they will only get one trip per month (generally, since as you pointed out it's 3 weeks).

I also seemed to try too many scenarios at once (various number of jumps with different cargo\passenger configurations for each). This muddied the waters, so to say.

No worries. Montly or biweekly summary is just a style choice.

I just had some trouble understanding all the costs on the "Ship Purchase Worksheet".

A three-week run accrued to a monthly summary should probably include 1⅓ trip to make comparisons fair.

- Cr 92.700\month mortgage means the final sale price was MCr 22,248. With the down payment of MCr 9,3, the initial sale price was MCr 31,548, which is a 70% discount from the book price of MCr 45,342. Was this the "new price" you used or was the ship cheaper to start?

- I thought annual maintenance was 0.1% of the ship price when it was new. Is this in error?

I accrue costs to a biweekly period for a single jump. A ship can normally do 25 jumps per year (+ maintenance), so I divide yearly cost by 25 to get the cost per jump.

kCr 92.7 × 25 / 12 = monthly mortgage of kCr 193.1 corresponding to a basic new Free Trader costing MCr 46.3 (according to HG).

Maintenance calculated the same way, so based on new cost, as it should.

- I altered the salaries to match a trial character I made up (rolled an Engineer\Astrogator). Thus, I assume the PC would hire a Pilot\Astrogator, Medic\Steward, and Marine\Gunner, with the secondary skill being 50% the listed salary.

OK, that explains why I didn't find any Engineer...

Yes, that crew is quite OK.

I would be a little wary of finding the right multi-skilled individuals, but reducing a six-man crew to four should be doable, especially as the owner is already filling two roles.

I would still include a salary for the owner, to separate the owners personal economy from the ship's corporate economy.

- I calculated annual fuel costs at 21tons x Cr 500\ton x 26 fuel ups\year. Monthly divides this by 12. This is basically the same as yours at Cr100 \fuel-up. I assumed cheap fuel was in less advanced starports; and Type A, B and C ports would not have unrefined available.

Technically you only need 25 jumps worth of fuel per year, you don't jump during maintenance, and ~12 times the power plant fuel, but I fudge that too (since CT).

Checking I see that you are correct: MgT specifies only refined fuel at A and B starports. I hadn't even noticed, I let all D+ starport sell unrefined fuel (since CT).

- Life Support was calculated with four 1-person staterooms for the crew (4 x Cr1000) plus six double passenger staterooms (6 x Cr2000) plus 20 low berths (20 x Cr100). Then I added the Additional Life Support costs at (16 x Cr1000) for 12 passengers and 4 crew.

It's kCr 1 for the stateroom (regardless of whether it's occupied or not) plus kCr 1 per person (Core, p145: Ignore the table, read the text below).

So, it should be kCr 10 for the rooms + kCr 16 for the people = kCr 26 (when the ship is full).

How does Standard vs High passage work?

You get the same stateroom, but High passengers gets the service of the steward with better meals etc, higher luggage allowance, and priority booking.

By default each passenger gets a private stateroom. If you allow dual occupancy I would adjust the price down.

So freighter captains can work this out without the Broker skill normally? Is there that much demand for passenger\cargo service?

Yes, that is the premise of the tramp Free Trader.

I would say that major trade routes are served better and cheaper by major shipping lines, but to/from less populous worlds passengers often travel on tramp traders.

I can remove the spreadsheet if you think it's confusing for new comers.

Absolutely no need. Everyone plays the game as they see fit.

 

[Condottiere]

Han chartered the Falcon to both Jabba and Obiwan.

 

[Greysword]

Thanks Dilbert! I appreciate going through it in detail.

I find the accounting unusually alluring. More so that any other RPG.

 

[Reynard]

"Han chartered the Falcon to both Jabba and Obiwan."

Han took chances with both for big scores. He was known to take chances.

Didn't always work considering his usual situations but he took chances. I think he spent far more time in seedy space bars than the docks keeping an ear for something lucrative. Traveller made such locations a staple for leads and rumors to something other than another load of iron or vegetables.

 

[PsiTraveller]

hi Greysword! Welcome to the forum. I am going to jump into the discussion and argue that there is a different way of looking at trade and shipping, at least as far as any ship capable of more that a Jump 1 is concerned. Jump 1 ships have other options as well and I will touch upon that at the end of the post. This muddies the waters in terms of the discussion, but from a mercantile point of view the rules allow a ship to maximize Jump engine performance. And it is getting the most from your Jump engines where a ship makes money.

A Jump 2 ship can make more money by moving more cargo at Jump 1 than it can make moving its normal amount of cargo at Jump 2, as long as the ship moves the maximum cargo that its Jump engines can move. This will involve either a Jump Net or External cargo mounts. (and cargo that can take being moved in such a manner.) If you work your trade pattern with this in mind you can make quite a bit of money.

A Far Trader has 64 tons of cargo capacity, internally. The ship has 15 tons of Jump engines rated Jump 2. This means you can move a total of 400 tons of volume a Jump 1 distance. (15 tons - 5 tons = 10 tons of Jump drives divided by 2.5 percent is 400 tons. )

So the Jump drives can move 400 tons Jump 1. So if you bought 2 tons of Jump Net for 600 000 credits (high Guard page 40) you would add 200 tons of cargo capacity for a Jump 1 trip. This means an extra 200 000 credits per trip, which is better than the 64 tons * 1600 credits per Jump 2 trip, or 102 400 credits per Jump 2 trip.

Your passenger income would be at the jump 1 rate, losing you 700 credits per passenger, but you make the extra 200 000 credits on the cargo, so that works out.


A Jump 1 ship would do well to look at adding 1 ton of battery, 1 ton of Jump net and 2.5 tons of Jump engine and adding 100 tons of cargo capacity to its Jump 1 route. This would pay for itself very quickly and changes the economics of a shipping business. You would need 10 tons of extra fuel as well. So demountable tanks in the cargo hold, or cargo/fuel cargo bays would be needed.

The payback in terms of cargo income from adding an extra 100 tons of capacity to a ship is 100 000 credits per trip. This is pretty significant. It's an area I think is under utilized in the game. Cargo mounts and Jump Nets. When the ship is not carrying cargo there is no loss in M drive performance. When full, well yes, your ship is slow, but profitable.


Just my 2 credits to toss into your thinking.

 

[Condottiere]

If outside of running costs, all other maintenance is paid for by the Scout Service, least cost of interstellar commerce is the hundred tonne scout, which is assigned to some of their detached semi retired members.

 

[Greysword]

hi Greysword! Welcome to the forum. I am going to jump into the discussion and argue that there is a different way of looking at trade and shipping, at least as far as any ship capable of more that a Jump 1 is concerned...

A Jump 2 ship can make more money by moving more cargo at Jump 1 than it can make moving its normal amount of cargo at Jump 2, as long as the ship moves the maximum cargo that its Jump engines can move. This will involve either a Jump Net or External cargo mounts. (and cargo that can take being moved in such a manner.) If you work your trade pattern with this in mind you can make quite a bit of money...

A Jump 1 ship would do well to look at adding 1 ton of battery, 1 ton of Jump net and 2.5 tons of Jump engine and adding 100 tons of cargo capacity to its Jump 1 route. This would pay for itself very quickly and changes the economics of a shipping business. You would need 10 tons of extra fuel as well. So demountable tanks in the cargo hold, or cargo/fuel cargo bays would be needed...

Just my 2 credits to toss into your thinking.

Thanks Psi! I don't have High Guard yet (the two FLGS I go to are out of nearly all Traveller stuff).

<I wonder if Mongoose's distributor is Diamond...>

I will pick one up as soon as it's available and check out the cargo nets and mounts. If they can be easily stored inside when not in use (or just not hurt performance), then it's a great idea! Definitely useful for role-play session, too. I wonder if the cargo can be jettisoned mid-flight should the authorities show up and the trader needs to dump some illicit cargo on the fly. 8)


Recalculating using AnotherDilbert's corrections to my spreadsheet, I came up with a new valuation where the biggest loss for a Far Trader on 2 one-Jump runs for a month carrying cargo-only would be a loss of KCr -24. This is worst case scenario, and isn't that bad. The captain would just break even if they could get a mail contract. Not sure how difficult that is, though. Thanks again, Dilbert!

If outside of running costs, all other maintenance is paid for by the Scout Service, least cost of interstellar commerce is the hundred tonne scout, which is assigned to some of their detached semi retired members.

The concern I have with these is price. Sure, used Scouts are the cheapest, but they also don;t have much in the way of cargo space, so they may be hard pressed to pay for themselves, unless they are used to ferry people and cargo willing to pay a higher price for travel that doesn't share space with the normal traffic (if you know what I mean). :wink: Of course, I was talking about dignitaries and valuable paintings (or just some cargo that needs to get there fast).

On the subject of old Scout ships, the setting and ancillary chatter about Traveller make it sound like the IISS has way more of these ships than they know what to do with. As such, why aren't they selling them as a super deep discount, before adding the "Old Ship" chart? Seems like of they have enough lying around to let discharged scouts put miles on the engines and frame for nothing, they would want to sell as many as possible.

 

[Condottiere]

 

[Greysword]

Still expensive, unless I want to be a belter for the rest of my days.

 

[Condottiere]

The big ticket items are engineering, followed by the hull, and then the bridge, for commercial shipping.

I'm pretty sure I've designed the cheapest starship in Traveller, though with some tweaking on the jump drive.

 

[Greysword]

The big ticket items are engineering, followed by the hull, and then the bridge, for commercial shipping.

I'm pretty sure I've designed the cheapest starship in Traveller, though with some tweaking on the jump drive.

So the Seeker is yours??? :shock:

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Confederation Cost Cutter Class

Ninety nine point five tonne technological level nine self sealing, unstreamlined, naturally armoured and gravitated light ferrous nickel planetoid [note one] hull with forty four point seven seven five hull points, costing 298'500 bux.

Two and a half tonne dual cockpit acts as primary bridge [note two] at fifteen kilobux, with free basic sensors, and a technological level seven factor five onboard computer at thirty kilobux; total 45 kilobux.

Software package includes a library, jump control one, and manoeuvre zero; total 100 kilobux

The option exists for three separate firmpoints, to which can be attached either a fixedly mounted virtual weapon system, or a technological level seven single turret [note three], at respectively one hundred kilobux and two hundred kilobux each; the default has a single mounted fixture, for but not with a [presumably] sandcaster weapon system; can be retrofitted, plus labour and yard time.

Nine factored one budgeted gravitic based energy inefficient manoeuvre drive modules, constructed at technological level nine; each module weighing one hundred kilogrammes and rated at a ten tonne thrust, costing 150 kilobux and requiring one point three power points; for a total weight of nine hundred kilogrammes, with a ninety tonne thrust performance requiring eleven point seven power points, at a cost of 1.35 megabux.

Combined with a modular nine pack anti-gravity factored one lifters [note four], constructed at technological level nine; each module weighing eighty kilogrammes and rated at a ten tonne lift, costing 160 kilobux and requiring one power point each; for a total weight of seven hundred twenty kilogrammes, with a ninety tonne lift performance requiring nine power points, at a costing of 1.44 megabux.

The power plant consists of four budgeted early fusion reactor modules, constructed at technological level eight; weighing in at one tonne each, costing 375 kilobux, and producing eight power points per round [note five]; for a total weight of three tonnes, with an output of thirty two power points, and costing 1.5 megabux.

The power plant is connected to a half a tonne of solar panelling [note six], whose output can either be shunted to the power plant, and/or the onboard [high efficiency] batteries, costing 50 kilobux.

One factored one budgeted increased size jump drive, constructed at technological level nine rated at two hundred parsec tonnes; totaling ten point five five tonnes costing 9.675 megabux [note seven].

You can tow along an interplanetary cargo net with a default volume of fourteen hundred cubic metres [note eight], available at technological level eight, costing 100 kilobux, which would basically half the engineering performance if completely full.

Jump bubble diameter is 223.737 metres, based on a fourteen hundred cubic metre volume.

For landing gear, half a tonne ferrous nickel lump is divided into three equal cones, distributed equally around the base of the sphere and welded to it, acting as a de facto landing tripod. If that's not an option, adding a half tonne hump anywhere on the hull would create enough ballast. Or attaching it to a rope and trailing it along.

There are four fuel tanks, the first two specifically meant to feed the power plant, are one tonne each. The other two, are hybrid cargo fuel containers, sized at ten and a half tonnes for a net total volume of ten tonnes each, costing a premium of 50 kilobux each.

One tonne fuel processor, capable of processing twenty tonnes per day, costing 50 kilobux.

There are two ingresses, the freebie [note nine] two tonne airlock, and a cargo hatch [note ten].

One tonne allocated for the ship's locker.

Accommodations are a ten tonne stable, with suitable light partitions to separate the added in bunks, and fixtures such as a seat toilet toilet, wash basin, and shower attached to the plumbing, sufficient for twenty human sized [note eleven] crew, costing 25 kilobux; with a self contained life support system that costs a net 2.5 kilobux per month [note twelve].

Cargo can be squeezed into the remaining 22.93 tonnes.

Total cost is 14.6835 megabux [note thirteen].

Adjusted costs due to discounts include ten percent (13.21515 megabux} for a standard ship design, and twenty percent for low automation (10.57212 megabux) [note fourteen]

Maintenance 28.964712328767123287671232876712 bux per day; well, 29.97 bux.

Power budget would be nineteen point nine points for basic ship systems [note fifteen], eleven point seven points for the manoeuvre drive, nine points for the gravitational lifters, and ten points for the monojump drive.

Crew requirement is for a pilot[/astrogator] and engineer[/copilot]; though presumably, one pilot would be sufficient, though would be operating at minus one shipboard task dice modifier checks after one week.


Notes:

one hollowed out equally (if you didn't just pour liquid nickel iron in a mold], and laser polished to a spherical shaped brilliant billiard ball.

two though it's unclear if two pilots would be mandatory; in any event, being a cockpit, it can be sealed off from the rest of the vessel, with a default life support for the two crewmembers for twenty four hours.

three at a nominal 200 kilobux per turret; upto three different weapon systems can be attached without additional cost; in theory, if firmpointed turrets are limited to single weapon systems, they don't require so much volume, nor cost as much.

four two disadvantages [orbital range] plus two technological advantages [size reduction, size reduction] cancel each other out and translate into eighty percent size reduction; combined, this ensures that the cutrater can leave any planetary object with a gravitational pull of less than one ppoint eight standard gravities; technological level limitations still apply at a hard factor one per, two if combined while within one and a quarter megametres from the surface, and possibly 0.909 gees further afield, if you think the additional nine energy points expenditure is worth it.

five budgeted increased size; regardless how you crunch the numbers, there's no cheaper technological level nine alternative.

six power plantless hulls have solar panels calculated on basic systems and thrust factor one energy requirements, which is basically thirty power points per hundred tonnes, so at technological level eight based early fusion reactors, that would three hundred kilogrammes, short of the minimum five hundred kilogrammes minimum.

seven five tonne increased size overhead costing 843.75 kilobux requiring one power point per ten parsec tonnes, five tonne increased size core costing 843.75 kilobux, five hundred fifty kilogrammes increased size capacitors costing 1.2375 megabux; totaling ten point five five tonnes costing 9.675 megabux.

eight it has a default diameter of thirteen point eight eight metres, so it's well within the jump bubble, so it gets dragged down the rabbit hole, despite High Guard saying that a ship cannot perform a jump while this net is deployed, as no discernible difference is mentioned between it and the jump net, and the characteristics of the jump net is a legacy of a pre bubble time.

nine seems inconsistently applied in Traveller, so the additional two tonnes and 100 kilobux is accounted for as you couldn't make it part of the overhead of any other ship component.

ten should be large enough for whatever expected cargo sized pallets or containers are the norm.

eleven you could subdivide it into three three tonne staterooms, with a shared one tonne fresher; panelling, fittings and furnishings are calculated separately.

twelve that's about one person per square.

thirteen not accounting for additional fittings and furnishings, nor the ten percent discount for mass production.

fourteen Traveller Companion: in this case, a holistic approach, rather than nitpicking; also, there's no way the crew intensive variant is feasible.

fifteen minimum 9.75 points with full thrust zero point nine gee 11.7 points equals 21.45 points; takeoff power requirement would be 30.45 points.