Starship operations reality vs expectations

[phavoc]

I'm a bit of a train nerd (real trains), so I follow things like average speeds of trains. I was looking at the latest STB data that railroads (caveat - this is all for US railroads), and 8 years ago the average speed of trains was a little under 26mph. Today it's skyrocketed up to a massive.... 27mph. And there have been peaks of times when it's surpassed 28mph.

This is the time for trains moving between terminals, so it excludes yard time, unloading time, shortlines moving cars, etc. It's all the big Class I railroads.

There's been lots of discussions on how fast starships would get turned around, but I have to wonder how many people take into account that reality is often littered with examples of just how that's not always true? Would efficiency be the norm, or would there other factors at play?

Railroading has implemented something called precision scheduled railroading (or PSR), which is kind of like operating trains like planes - the freight leaves point A at 2pm every day - and rather than add more trains if you happen to max out the length/weight of your train, you add more locomotives to pull more cars. Instead of separating out types of loads and such, you just mix it all together. Railroads love it because it's cheaper for them, but shippers hate it because delivery service is actually poorer (i.e. more delays). There are many books and articles on the pro's and cons of this if you are interested.

The point though is that this is a reality in railroading and transport - but would anyone actually try to replicate such things in their game setting as a mcguffin device for their games?

 

[Limpin Legin]

I'm a bit of a train nerd (real trains), so I follow things like average speeds of trains. I was looking at the latest STB data that railroads (caveat - this is all for US railroads), and 8 years ago the average speed of trains was a little under 26mph. Today it's skyrocketed up to a massive.... 27mph. And there have been peaks of times when it's surpassed 28mph.

This is the time for trains moving between terminals, so it excludes yard time, unloading time, shortlines moving cars, etc. It's all the big Class I railroads.

There's been lots of discussions on how fast starships would get turned around, but I have to wonder how many people take into account that reality is often littered with examples of just how that's not always true? Would efficiency be the norm, or would there other factors at play?

Railroading has implemented something called precision scheduled railroading (or PSR), which is kind of like operating trains like planes - the freight leaves point A at 2pm every day - and rather than add more trains if you happen to max out the length/weight of your train, you add more locomotives to pull more cars. Instead of separating out types of loads and such, you just mix it all together. Railroads love it because it's cheaper for them, but shippers hate it because delivery service is actually poorer (i.e. more delays). There are many books and articles on the pro's and cons of this if you are interested.

The point though is that this is a reality in railroading and transport - but would anyone actually try to replicate such things in their game setting as a mcguffin device for their games?

If the PC POV is more fun, then do it. Otherwise, handwave the game onto something that they find enjoyable or challenging.

 

[Condottiere]

Megatonne freighters would almost certainly work on a schedule established a decade before.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Megatonne freighters would almost certainly work on a schedule established a decade before.

That made me start thinking of the random elements of the time/location for the jump arrival. What if the bigger ships were given an advantage in jump accuracy by their very mass (and that they can afford better Astrogators/Engineers than the Free/Far Traders can)? It helps add to reasons why the "big boys" can always squeeze out the small traders. They can actually keep to a reasonably accurate schedule without building in large delays unlike the little ships.

Disadvantage is anyone planning to attack one on arrival will have a better idea when/where the arrival is going to happen.

 

[MasterGwydion]

That made me start thinking of the random elements of the time/location for the jump arrival. What if the bigger ships were given an advantage in jump accuracy by their very mass (and that they can afford better Astrogators/Engineers than the Free/Far Traders can)? It helps add to reasons why the "big boys" can always squeeze out the small traders. They can actually keep to a reasonably accurate schedule without building in large delays unlike the little ships.

Disadvantage is anyone planning to attack one on arrival will have a better idea when/where the arrival is going to happen.

I am fine with the not being able to predict the time in jump space, what drives Me nuts is making the Astrogation roll, and still not knowing where you are going to show up other than saying on the edge of a 100D area.

Right now, if I want to be more accurate, I aim for a 10-ton satellite in a far orbit (just past 100D of the planet) and I can come out of jumpspace almost on top of it everytime, but if I aim for a planet, I could be thousands of kilometers off target even with successful rolls.

Give Us one out of two. Either We know where We come out of jumpspace or we know when. Not knowing either is just an annoyance with a huge impact in how the game works.

 

[rinku]

Sounds like Science to me. Pure Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

I would not really expect Jump Space to be any less weird than Quantum Physics.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Sounds like Science to me. Pure Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

I would not really expect Jump Space to be any less weird than Quantum Physics.

So, I guess drop a 10-ton buoy-beacon just past the 100D line from the planet and you have a very accurate place to jump to. When you show up is still up in the air, but you can nail where every single time.

 

[Condottiere]

You could programme where you come out, just not when.

Or, you could programme when you come out, just not where.

To keep it gameable, within certain time frames and areas of space.

 

[MasterGwydion]

You could programme where you come out, just not when.

Or, you could programme when you come out, just not where.

To keep it gameable, within certain time frames and areas of space.

Best IISS Scout Game ever! Set to come out of jumpspace in a week and explore wherever you end up. Hope it´s not too far to get back home before your Spares run out...

Accidentally jump in front of the Zhodani Core Expeditions. Then you have a Voyager-style game trying to get home.

 

[Condottiere]

It's seems an ideal way to complete projects, or homework, based on the time aspect.

 

[Sigtrygg]

The time variable only appears to matter to the ship,.

A ship jumps from point A to point B. We are told many times that jump is extremely accurate. So if point B is the 100D limit of your destination world you arrive within a few thousand km every time.

But, the jump duration is variable, if two ships jump from A to B at exactly the same time they have different times in jump, according to the prevalent fanon made canon. The consequence of this is that the ships travel different distances in different times to arrive at nearly the same arrival point.

Why the different distances - because the destination system B is moving, so if you plot to arrive where it will be in 7 days, but your time in jump is only 6 days you still arrive at the 100D point, if it takes 8 days you still arrive at the same point (note to the pedantic - by same I mean at the 100D limit of B within the 1000s of km error)

The planet is moving around the star, the star is moving with respect to the galaxy, the galaxy is... you get the point, So somehow the jumpy wumpy physics ignores relative motion (or is factored in) and ignores temporal variability to always arrive within 1000s of km of your destination.

 

[swordtart]

The time variable only appears to matter to the ship,.

A ship jumps from point A to point B. We are told many times that jump is extremely accurate. So if point B is the 100D limit of your destination world you arrive within a few thousand km every time.

But, the jump duration is variable, if two ships jump from A to B at exactly the same time they have different times in jump, according to the prevalent fanon made canon. The consequence of this is that the ships travel different distances in different times to arrive at nearly the same arrival point.

Why the different distances - because the destination system B is moving, so if you plot to arrive where it will be in 7 days, but your time in jump is only 6 days you still arrive at the 100D point, if it takes 8 days you still arrive at the same point (note to the pedantic - by same I mean at the 100D limit of B within the 1000s of km error)

The planet is moving around the star, the star is moving with respect to the galaxy, the galaxy is... you get the point, So somehow the jumpy wumpy physics ignores relative motion (or is factored in) and ignores temporal variability to always arrive within 1000s of km of your destination.

Why would the time variable only matter to the ship? If you spend an extra day in jump then you arrive a day later. If you are at the spaceport waiting for a delivery (or want to leave on a particular day and your expected ship isn't in yet) then that one day difference will matter to you also.
Transit times in from the 100D limits of large stars or planets will have more of an impact but that is at least predictable for any given M-Drive.

Could the explanation of the different time in jump not be due to other factors? Do you actually "move" in jump space or is the translation instantaneous and it is just the time to connect up the worm holes in space. Or maybe slightly different jump space densities generate different jump "velocities", or a gazillion other possibilities. All we are told is that it takes a variable amount of time to be in jump regardless of distance travelled.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Because if you spend an extra day in jump the system and world you have plotted a 7 day jump for is not going to be where and when you plotted it to be in 7 days, and yet somehow you arrive at the right place relative to the destination world.

Two ships, X and Y at world A plot a jump to the 100D boundary of world B. They jump at the same time.

Ship X arrives in 6 days, yet it plotted for where B would be in 7 days, yet somehow arrived at point B.

Ship Y also arrives at point B in 8 days, again having plotted a 7 day jump, yet somehow arrives at point B

 

[Condottiere]

I think you can tweak the mechanism a bit.

If the jump drive is perfectly synchronized, time experienced in jump space is the exact same as the estimated time of arrival.

 

[rinku]

Passage of time spent in the Jumpspace reference frame does not have to line up with the passage of time in the origin or destination reference frames. That's confirmed from the possibility of a timewise misjump.

And... it doesn't break physics in any way.

 

[swordtart]

Because if you spend an extra day in jump the system and world you have plotted a 7 day jump for is not going to be where and when you plotted it to be in 7 days, and yet somehow you arrive at the right place relative to the destination world.

Two ships, X and Y at world A plot a jump to the 100D boundary of world B. They jump at the same time.

Ship X arrives in 6 days, yet it plotted for where B would be in 7 days, yet somehow arrived at point B.

Ship Y also arrives at point B in 8 days, again having plotted a 7 day jump, yet somehow arrives at point B

This assumes that your plot is to a specific place in space rather that for example a specific "intrusion" into jump space (due to a gravity well for example). If that were the case you do not need to know where the planet is in real space and any delta between the position in real space over the course of the variation in jump is irrelevant as your are navigating to the intrusion. Jump space navigation is different you may be navigating by characteristics of the planet rather than a "position" or maybe you move along the J-Axis of a 2d graph because the X, Y and Z axes have been factored out in getting to J.

We don't know how jump space works, we just know the game mechanics that describe it. If a referee or players "explanation" of how jump space works is inconsistent with the game mechanics or makes then appear illogical then you need to rethink the explanation, not change the rules.

 

[phavoc]

Passage of time spent in the Jumpspace reference frame does not have to line up with the passage of time in the origin or destination reference frames. That's confirmed from the possibility of a timewise misjump.

And... it doesn't break physics in any way.

This COULD be very true - except that nowhere in the books do we see anything mentioned about people aging at different rates outside of normal time - similar to how Halderman's The Forever War was. The time dilation effect here is small - perhaps 1-2 days/month. But if you are a career spacer who's spent a few decades in space and lost say 1 day/month due to time dilation effects, you'd have aged faster.

Your explanation is one possible variant, but its one not without causing other possible issues. In most games aging to the point where your characters capabilities are severely degraded is not a thing really. For the most part gaming sessions/groups break up and reform before that becomes an issue.

Still, things like this are just another example of how a games underlying system needs to be well thought-out in order to minimize things like this. I've never played a game yet that filled in ALL it's holes, but some make their background more complete than others. I started Traveller when it was first published. Started D&D with the AD&D rather than the basic set. There was a world of difference in the completeness of the rules between basic and advanced D&D, and Traveller continued to get layers upon layers added to it, with the occasional tweak of previously published materials. I had high hopes on the iterative process cleaning things up, but sadly the tradition has remained.

 

[Condottiere]

Wages could be an issue,

The onset of physical deterioration.

Seniority.

Pensions.

Accountants will want to pay for the least amount of time, and may restrict wages to actual time experienced, or by calendar, whichever pays out less.