Starship Design - Non Streamlined craft

[IanBruntlett]

Surely, standard cargo containers were figured out for Traveller, at least by the DGP period in the 80s. And you can bet that any 100,000 ton cargoliner is going to be a LASH setup...

What is a LASH setup?

 

[sideranautae]

Surely, standard cargo containers were figured out for Traveller, at least by the DGP period in the 80s. And you can bet that any 100,000 ton cargoliner is going to be a LASH setup...

What is a LASH setup?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighter_aboard_ship

 

[phavoc]

Hmm I was wondering why nobody had considered a jump tender with cargo racks operating between just a few systems. small craft load and unload at each end and it just jumps between the systems delivering the cargo.

Imperial regulations don't really allow for robotic spacecraft. There are some exceptions (like short-range drones or probes), but for the most part they require a being in the loop.

Surely, standard cargo containers were figured out for Traveller, at least by the DGP period in the 80s. And you can bet that any 100,000 ton cargoliner is going to be a LASH setup...

What is a LASH setup?

LASH stands for Lighter Aboard Ship. It was a concept developed in the early sixties primarily for cargo to be delivered to a port and then sent up a river towards its final destination. Each LASH was a barge essentially, and massed around 300 tons. When they first debuted they were pretty handy - a LASH ship could fully unload its cargo in 18hrs - a HUGE increase in time. But at that time most cargo was dry-bulk and required a large number of stevedores to load/unload. Rail wasn't what it is today, and the highway system also wasn't what it is today.

Today road traffic is quite efficient, rail even more so, and water, well, if you can get to/from where you need to by water it's the cheapest way to move the most cargo. A crew of 40 can man a ship transporting 11,000 containers (more as the ships get larger).

The LASH concept might still work in Traveller, but like I mentioned previously it wouldn't be a total replacement. Like every other cargo modality it will work well in some cases, not so well in others. As far as most players are concerned it's irrelevant (unless they plan on taking up piracy). Their free-trader will still take on small containers, and even break-bulk, palletized, or just odd sized cargo's. Containers are great, but like an SAP implementation, they are only great as long as you can fit within the confines of a container. But don't take that to mean I'm dissing ERP solutions. No, I would never!

 

[Anonymous]

I thought I was paying attention but am I?

SAP and ERP are what?

 

[sideranautae]

Imperial regulations don't really allow for robotic spacecraft. There are some exceptions (like short-range drones or probes), but for the most part they require a being in the loop.

Incorrect. There is no Imperium law against that

 

[phavoc]

I thought I was paying attention but am I?

SAP and ERP are what?

ERP = Enterprise Resource Planning. Essentially it lets the big guys in the ivory tower know how many widgets were sold, how many hours were spent doing it, and where they can make changes to enhance operations and profitability. In reality it sometimes does more harm than good because all you have are numbers and you have no idea what the reality is. But since most companies are run by accountants these days, it really doesn't matter to most.

SAP = A German software company that is a top-ranked provider of ERP software packages.

Imperial regulations don't really allow for robotic spacecraft. There are some exceptions (like short-range drones or probes), but for the most part they require a being in the loop.

Incorrect. There is no Imperium law against that

I will have to see if I can dig up the correct quote. But if robots were legal pilots, why aren't the X-boats robotic? Seems might stupid to me to put a human in a ship that's only purpose is to jump from system to system to deliver electronic mail and wholly depends on external support for everything. If that doesn't meet the classic standard of "let's automate that" then nothing ever will.

 

[Rick]

Imperial regulations don't really allow for robotic spacecraft. There are some exceptions (like short-range drones or probes), but for the most part they require a being in the loop.

The argument is not valid. phavoc has simply assumed I was referring to robotic craft. I was not, nor did I imply otherwise. I was referring to manned craft.

 

[phavoc]

Imperial regulations don't really allow for robotic spacecraft. There are some exceptions (like short-range drones or probes), but for the most part they require a being in the loop.

The argument is not valid. phavoc has simply assumed I was referring to robotic craft. I was not, nor did I imply otherwise. I was referring to manned craft.

Were you referring to starships that carried spaceships as their cargo?

The TNE sourcebooks had clipper-class vessels that could transport spacecraft between systems. This was done because jump drives were rare and quite expensive.

 

[Rick]

I didn't really have an existing ship in mind - the concept I was thinking of was a ship with good jump drive, minimal manoeuvre drive, a cockpit and small crew area, but racks and racks of cargo containers. System ships would be in both the starting and destination systems to unload the containers and load others for the return trip, and the ship would simply do a shuttle run between two, or a few systems. As sideranautae said, it would probably only be worth doing in the core systems, along a regular trade route where a volume of trade was guaranteed.

 

[Anonymous]

Some (OK, I haven't listed any) of the colony worlds in places like the Spinward Marches have existed for many centuries, I'd argue its more than feasible to have containerised cargo ships plying the Spinward Main, the trouble is that the OTU didn't detail them therefore for the Grognards, they can't possibly exist...

In a small ship universe I can easily see free trader versions that are designed for containers, the 30 tonne module being an easy start but there's plenty of space to introduce your own standard sizes which would be sealed for vacuum use but had modules inside for easier distribution on planets.

 

[sideranautae]

I didn't really have an existing ship in mind - the concept I was thinking of was a ship with good jump drive, minimal manoeuvre drive, a cockpit and small crew area, but racks and racks of cargo containers. System ships would be in both the starting and destination systems to unload the containers and load others for the return trip, and the ship would simply do a shuttle run between two, or a few systems. As sideranautae said, it would probably only be worth doing in the core systems, along a regular trade route where a volume of trade was guaranteed.

Within the MgT game rules there is a fly for that ointment. Exact jump destination precision doesn't exist. A ship often ends up days away (considering 1 or 2 G M-drives) from its intended jump entry point.

 

[sideranautae]

Some (OK, I haven't listed any) of the colony worlds in places like the Spinward Marches have existed for many centuries, I'd argue its more than feasible to have containerised cargo ships plying the Spinward Main, the trouble is that the OTU didn't detail them therefore for the Grognards, they can't possibly exist...

GURPS does well at estimating overall intersystem cargo traffic. You could check those rules and readily see which routes would qualify. The J1 Mains in the Marches encompass non-qualifying systems. So it would probably apply to 2-3 world runs that are scattered about.

 

[Rick]

I didn't really have an existing ship in mind - the concept I was thinking of was a ship with good jump drive, minimal manoeuvre drive, a cockpit and small crew area, but racks and racks of cargo containers. System ships would be in both the starting and destination systems to unload the containers and load others for the return trip, and the ship would simply do a shuttle run between two, or a few systems. As sideranautae said, it would probably only be worth doing in the core systems, along a regular trade route where a volume of trade was guaranteed.

Within the MgT game rules there is a fly for that ointment. Exact jump destination precision doesn't exist. A ship often ends up days away (considering 1 or 2 G M-drives) from its intended jump entry point.

Exit point, but point taken. Yes - not necessarily a complete deal breaker, but enough of a wrinkle to make life difficult. Oh well, back to the drawing board! :twisted:

 

[GypsyComet]

The next step up from that is the equivalent of Dune's model: one jumpship, many carried system craft (some of them potentially quite large). This mode is described in a late Rebellion TAS News item as becoming common in Ley Sector, which implies that it is not common prior to that. Simple economic reasons could lead to the change, but the idea is feasible within some MGT's version of engineering, though you really need High Guard for the right components.

Economically, you would still need to figure out the price to make it work.

 

[Anonymous]

TNE had the jump tenders I believe, formed the basis for the board game Battle Rider that TNE spawned, I seem to recall that the idea was around in the FFW too but I might be hazy on the details, it was a while back.

Can't see it working for commercial shipping tho

 

[GypsyComet]

The Battle Rider/Battle Tender concept was around in Classic as a naval doctrine being tested by the Frontier Wars. The great weakness of the concept for warships is the vulnerability of the carrier, and the utter dependence on the carrier by the Riders if a battle goes badly. That weakness is not really an issue for peacetime applications.

The effect is similar to settings with Gate tech. The ships don't need anything special since something else is providing the FTL. Battletech used the idea as well.

Keeping it in the realm of the Core book plus High Guard's grapples, you could have a 1000 ton ship with an N jump drive and power plant and a K Maneuver drive, about half its tonnage dedicated to fuel, and about 200 tons of assorted Docking Clamps (HG p45-46). An extra thousand tons of non-jump-capable craft can hitch a ride and still go two parsecs. The precise range varies with the tonnage of hitchhikers. You might need to have fuel tenders at each stop, or carry a fuel Shuttle in one clamp.

 

[Patron Zero]

Just my unsolicited two pence here but non-streamlined ships are a viable thing proving one covers a few issues such vessels cannot avoid.

- Any-all skimming of gas giants must be done by an axillary craft, say a streamlined drone or other small craft fitted for such duties. A 50Ton Cutter with a 'harvester' pod is an example.

- Any transport planet-side of passengers or freight would be dependent upon a 'dedicated' shuttle for just that task, my suggestion would be a small craft capable of carrying a standard cargo module as the bare minimum.

With the prevalence of high-ports or other orbital facilities, hiring local transport to-from the surface of a world would be feasible but in the long run not very economical.

 

[sideranautae]

Just my unsolicited two pence here but non-streamlined ships are a viable thing proving one covers a few issues such vessels cannot avoid.

- Any-all skimming of gas giants must be done by an axillary craft,

In MgT it is not only streamlined ships that can skim and enter atmosphere to land. non-streamlined Standard hulls can also.

 

[silburnl]

But if robots were legal pilots, why aren't the X-boats robotic?

IMTU the pilots of X-boats are personally responsible for the integrity of the data they are carrying. Delivering data which is subsequently found to have been tampered with gets you cashiered right quick.

Regards
Luke

 

[Reynard]

And it seems no one in Traveller universes seem to trust a robot to operate all starship functions unsupervised for a week let alone in system ships. Why is that?