Thousand Ton Traders

[Condottiere]

Time is money; the owner wants the quickest turnaround, and that probably is achieved by dumping the cargo at the orbital starport, tanking up and loading new cargo, and a quick route to the nearest transition point.

While a trader with twenty percent plus fuel tanks and a factor one jump drive can cover a jump two route, his costs practically double.

 

[wbnc]

Now we go to sexy with streamlining. As said earlier, a trader of any size that spend that extra cred for this configuration is a different beast. It is purpose built to go where no other freighter is designed to go.

A freighter with streamlining can go no place that a freighter with a standard hull can go. Why pay the extra money?

Rules for atmospheric maneuvering tend to make the streamlined hull far mor useful for a starship. ( Page 137, Core Rulebook, Mongoose Version)
The streamlining allows pilots to operate in atmosphere more safely. The penalty for a Stamford hull is enough to cancel out the skill of a pilot. When maneuvering close to a surface or around other ships a streamlined vessel allows a pilot to use all their skill to avoid collisions and unplanned contact with the ground.

In addition with a standard hull any maneuver requires a Pilot Check, where a streamlined hulled ship requires checks only when operating in extreme conditions.

It gets worse for Distributed hulls they have to make a pilot check with a -4 DM, ev er minute it is in atmo or the ship takes 2d6 pts of damage.

For example if a pilot has a skill rating of Pilot 2, and is flying a standard hull in atmo...he effectively has a skill of Pilot 0 in atmo due to the ships maneuver penalties....the pilot must also make a pilot check when attempting anything other than straight line flight...such as landing, maneuvering around objects or obstacles, or other ships etc.

 

[phavoc]

Time is money; the owner wants the quickest turnaround, and that probably is achieved by dumping the cargo at the orbital starport, tanking up and loading new cargo, and a quick route to the nearest transition point.

While a trader with twenty percent plus fuel tanks and a factor one jump drive can cover a jump two route, his costs practically double.

That works for Class A/B starports, but it's more iffy with C/D. A Class C MIGHT have an orbital component, but if the local world doesn't have the capacity to handle that kind of cargo transfer requirement (lift capacity, or just adequate vehicles) then the freighter needs to go dock dirtside to do the cargo work.

Plus planets with a dearth of orbital infrastructure are going to have a hard time lifting fuel to orbit to fuel the ships.

Yeah, time is money, and lost time is lost profits, but if your only option is go dirtside, that's where the profit is.

 

[Condottiere]

The thread is about thousand tonne traders, but at this point, for secondary trade routes, I'd certainly advocate for making four hundred tonne streamlined rust buckets viable.

Downport could be near an ocean, which means that you can pump water directly to fuel processors, who can then store them in fuel farms.

For playability reasons, I'd certainly push for players to acquire two hundred and four hundred tonne starships.

 

[Reynard]

The more we understand the workings of trade route, the better we can design and justify thousand ton traders. These relative behemoths are terribly expensive. They need a reason to exist. They are definitely not adventurer ships unless the adventurers are hired help to a trading company.

What are they able to do that smaller traders and larger freighters aren't already doing? Best way to say it, take the Heavy Freighter and streamline it for an extra MCr20 and remove the 95 ton shuttle. What is it able to do the normal freighter can't compete with?

 

[Condottiere]

I'm more inclined to think that you only really get economies of scale in capital class.

 

[F33D]

Best way to say it, take the Heavy Freighter and streamline it for an extra MCr20 and remove the 95 ton shuttle. What is it able to do the normal freighter can't compete with?

Lose money.

I've seen some well produced spreadsheets that cover ships from 200dt - 10,000dt and it is pretty razor edge on profits. Heavy freighters lose money going to backwater planets (those too poor/unpopulated to have star port infrastructure like orbital facilities) as they cannot fill their holds...

 

[GypsyComet]

Heavy freighters lose money going to backwater planets (those too poor/unpopulated to have star port infrastructure like orbital facilities) as they cannot fill their holds...

Which may mean they operate under subsidy, just like the 400 and 600 ton ships do. One or more of the worlds in the route subsidize the ship to keep the trade moving around.

Alternately, this is the size where the "leftovers" nature of the trade rules has to transition to dedicated brokers, shipping contracts, and other large scale commercial arrangements. The reason the 200 ton Free Trader has to look hard is because he's picking up the scraps that last week's Heavy Freighter ran out of room to carry.

 

[F33D]

Heavy freighters lose money going to backwater planets (those too poor/unpopulated to have star port infrastructure like orbital facilities) as they cannot fill their holds...

Which may mean they operate under subsidy,

Could be but, that isn't the question. They could also be operated as a non-profit, pro bono transport service owned by a mega-corp. Not the issue when asking if they would be viable or not. But, your right in saying that they wouldn't be viable as built.

 

[phavoc]

The other way to address the cost issue is to adjust your intervals. It may be that a planet/system only gets a monthly, or even every other month cargo run. If what you have is super valuable you contract with smaller freighters. But the bulk of the regular cargo comes in monthly. Surely a planetary or system population in the tens of millions would be robust enough to generate 50-80 10 ton containers worth of cargo per month. We see that level of trade today (greater usually). In the poorer regions and land-locked countries that cargo is delivered by trucks.

As an aside, one thing the Imperium doesn't have as much problem with is exchange rates. All trade is denominated in credits. I don't think 3,000 plus worlds that are independent would actually have such a trade policy, but it certainly makes it easier to handle gaming wise. In reality I think you'd see thousands of local currencies as planets adjusted their currency value as their economic needs required it.

 

[Reynard]

And there's the difference between freighters built with all the fat removed then put on safe routes with needs handled by the port services compared to traders taking chances to put in big though risky scores where everyone else fears to tread. Like mom and pop stores, most die off early but a few with good (and luck) crews make it to build up.

I'd say 1K traders are taking the biggest chances so they tend to do jobs and routes with the biggest payoff the others can't or won't try. A successful 1K is going to have bragging right for
the sponsoring company.

 

[F33D]

And there's the difference between freighters built with all the fat removed then put on safe routes with needs handled by the port services compared to traders taking chances to put in big though risky scores where everyone else fears to tread.

Right. Which is why you only would see small "free traders" doing that. Those that have enough MCredits to build "747" scale freighters don't run run around trying to scrounge crumbs in backwaters looking a few credits here and there. :lol:

 

[Condottiere]

You have to actually game this out.

Anyway, generally speaking the business plan would have the freighters profitably even with spare capacity, competition might prompt overbooking and agreements with other shipping companies to take the overflow.

You have to take account for subsidies, if any, but unless there's some strategic reason for a major shipping corporation to maintain a service to the system, they'd probably abandon any scheduled runs with their own freighters, and might just subcontract it to a smaller company, who somehow can operate the service far more economically.

 

[Reynard]

Just for fun, I turned the Heavy Freighter into a Heavy Trader. Upgraded to 2G thrust, civilian electronics, 10 hardpoints of sand/beam/beam, fuel scoops and processors (200tons/day), 40 low berths and 18 staterooms for an average crew requirement. Those staterooms can be used for passengers and the crew double bunk as needed. There's 476 tons for cargo which can be modified depending on need and money.

The ten gunners are most often from the ranks of Trade crew, Fleet hands and Fleet security though others will do as long as they have some Gunner training. The Ship's Officer will often be a broker representing the patron company.

As Frontier trades, they can do well as chartered colony transports with their large low berth capacity as well as their sizable cargo room.

 

[alex_greene]

The Heavy Trader would probably need a crew comprising mostly Travellers, most of whom mustered out with at least one Ship Share apiece, and possibly several Ship Shares each. And probably exercise that option of obtaining an extra ten Ship Shares in exchange for piling a few years on her frame as well.

 

[wbnc]

oky found the rough I did of a 1000 ton trader...Its not accurate on a few things....but it's a fairly good version of a trader....remember it's just a rough from my old notes.


from my notes it looks like a 1000 ton ship with soe pretty heavy guns and extra spaces for security would still have 450+ tons of cargo, and 56 tons of passenger accomidations.... with tweaks to make it a bit more profitable such as disposing of marines, and dropping state rooms for more cargo space it would be on the low side of profitable simply running frieght and not speculating....

http://wbyrd.deviantart.com/art/heavy-Trader-534726252