Updated Vehicle Handbook in the works

[MasterGwydion]

That's why I did both - square meters is fine and required for outside, 4 Spaces = 1 dton for inside.

So, half a Dton? So that is what? 1.53m x 1.53m x 3m? Isn't that 2 and 1/3 Spaces? Not 2? Am I doing something wrong with My math?

 

[Condottiere]

Square metres would make the assumption about a fixed height.

As regards tonnage as volume, one and a half metres squared is convention; I think personal space area?

 

[Arkathan]

So, half a Dton? So that is what? 1.53m x 1.53m x 3m? Isn't that 2 and 1/3 Spaces? Not 2? Am I doing something wrong with My math?

Dton is 4 spaces, 5x10(x10). Half a dton is two spaces. One space is equivalent to a 250kg weapon in a small weapons turret in HG.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Square metres would make the assumption about a fixed height.

As regards tonnage as volume, one and a half metres squared is convention; I think personal space area?

Yeah. Square meters. The height is zero otherwise it would be a cubic measurement. A square is a two-dimensional shape.

 

[Condottiere]

Usually, you sell apartments and houses by area.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Usually, you sell apartments and houses by area.

With absolutely zero agreement on height, correct? So, it is not a valid method of conveying information while describing a 3D space. So that same 100m2 of house could be 3 meters tall or it could be 50 meters tall. If it is a 100m2 footprint then it could be 500 floors of 100m2 and still take up the same amount of land as 100m2 of agricultural space. If the only numbers you have are in 2 dimensions, then it is nearly impossible to translate to 3 dimensions.

So, to use your example. Would you prefer to buy a 100m2 house or a 100m2 house? One is a house with normal level ceilings and the other has double height, vaulted ceilings. Square footage (meterage?) is less important in Traveller than volume, since ships, vehicles, and structures all use volume, not square footage (meterage?). If I give a number in square meters, you will forever need more information to be able to use it in Traveller. A simple two-dimensional number will never be sufficient for any construction rules in Traveller. You will always require more information.

So, My point is that it is inaccurate for what We will be using it for.

 

[MasterGwydion]

So another one of those things from a different thread that I'm trying to sneak into the infrastructure section. Mostly stolen from ideas from the Isaac Arthur arcology tab (though I don't agree with his 10,000 square feet per person living area assumption. Anyway, here's an excerpt - essentially at TL12 there is zero difference between a biosphere space and an agricultural zone, and that's intentional. Feel free to poke at my concepts and math:

View attachment 3060

Also, all of your Non-hydroponic farming is only for Earth-like worlds. What about non-earthlike worlds? If I have to enclose the whole thing in a dome to protect the plants from the atmosphere, it will cost a lot more than 5Cr per 420m2. Just something that should be taken into account.

 

[Arkathan]

Also, all of your Non-hydroponic farming is only for Earth-like worlds. What about non-earthlike worlds? If I have to enclose the whole thing in a dome to protect the plants from the atmosphere, it will cost a lot more than 5Cr per 420m2. Just something that should be taken into account.

At the same time, the people involved in that will want the same level of protection, so all of their amenities will be equally affected by increased costs.

There are varying degrees of protection, so you don't have to go full vacuum sealing for a taint or thin atmosphere.
The above things are stuff you add to an existing structure/vehicle, so whatever protections they have is paid for already, and what you can fit inside benefits from it.

The places that non-hydroponics make any sense is a city sized construct, like an O'Neill Cylinder, and in that case, you need the vacuum rating and rad shielding.

 

[Geir]

At the same time, the people involved in that will want the same level of protection, so all of their amenities will be equally affected by increased costs.

There are varying degrees of protection, so you don't have to go full vacuum sealing for a taint or thin atmosphere.
The above things are stuff you add to an existing structure/vehicle, so whatever protections they have is paid for already, and what you can fit inside benefits from it.

The places that non-hydroponics make any sense is a city sized construct, like an O'Neill Cylinder, and in that case, you need the vacuum rating and rad shielding.

Right. The cost is for the farm only, not for the environmental enclosure around it... I was going to say dome, but since Spaces is volume and surface area of a (half) sphere is squared with radius.... hmmm... maybe a blue box on environmental coatings on domes... as an aside, for those who want it.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Right. The cost is for the farm only, not for the environmental enclosure around it... I was going to say dome, but since Spaces is volume and surface area of a (half) sphere is squared with radius.... hmmm... maybe a blue box on environmental coatings on domes... as an aside, for those who want it.

I hadn't considered that, but the blue box idea would work and be cool.

Edit- Secondary thought on your coating idea. Why not just make coatings for all vehicles? Make it a hull add-on, like Radiation Shielding is for spaceships.

 

[Condottiere]

Regarding farming in an enclosed environment, it could depend on geology.

If the rock formation is relatively air tight, you could use a fusion gun and melt out a dome; presumably, the melted rock becomes airtight.

Then life support, however you define life support for plants.

 

[J. L. Brown]

I just noticed fission plants are completely awful.

I saw this little blurb on FaceBook:

Only 4 kilograms of uranium are required to power a nuclear submarine for 30 years without refueling. The reactors used in nuclear submarines are based on highly enriched uranium (HEU), which contains 90% or more uranium-235. This enriched uranium can produce a large amount of energy in small quantities. Four to five kilograms of enriched uranium can power a nuclear submarine for several decades, as nuclear fission reactions produce a tremendous amount of energy. The energy produced by the fission of one kilogram of uranium-235 is equivalent to approximately 24,000,000 kilowatt-hours.

and decided to compare it to HG u2022 p17 'TL 6 Fission Power Plant'. 1 dTon of reactor produces 6 power, and (p18) says:

Chemical power plants require 10 tons of fuel per ton of power plant for every two weeks of operation. Other power plants require fuel tankage equal to 10% of their size (rounding up, minimum one ton).

Which is 1.4 cubic meters of (~ 26740 kg) HEU every fourteen days.

[Edit to add:
TL6 Fission 26740 kg U-235 x 24000 MWh / 6 power / 336 hours between fuelings / 3600 seconds per hour = 88.0 MW per power point output
TL8 Fusion 100 kg H-1 x 90000 MWh / 8 power / 336 hours between fuelings / 3600 seconds per hour = 1.00 MW per power point
TL12 Fusion 100 kg H-1 x 90000 MWh / 15 power / 336 hours between fuelings / 3600 seconds per hour = 0.49 MW per power point
TL15 Fusion 100 kg H-1 x 90000 MWh / 20 power / 336 hours between fuelings / 3600 seconds per hour = 0.37 MW per power point
TL20 Antimatter 100 kg p- x 90 000 000 000 MWh / 100 power / 336 hours between fuelings / 3600 seconds per hour = 74404761 MW per power point
/Edit]

 

[Arkathan]

I suspect the writer forgot that he had fission in there. While you do not have to replace the actual fuel for the life of the mortgage, more or less, you do have to replace coolant frequently. In an ocean-going vessel, this is irrelevant. Distillers make short work of seawater, but in space, space-fuel is about as close as you get.
Edit: To be clear, since there is no price set for uranium in HG22, you are safe to assume that the fission plant is utilizing raw fuel as a coolant, and this needs frequent replenishment.

 

[Condottiere]

I've given up on fission.

That's why I retermed them as prefusion; they make convenient colonial power plants.

Obviously, prefusion reactors are better than chemical power plants, so I've decided that mechanics can operate, maintain and repair them, as compensation.

 

[Arkathan]

I've given up on fission.

That's why I retermed them as prefusion; they make convenient colonial power plants.

Obviously, prefusion reactors are better than chemical power plants, so I've decided that mechanics can operate, maintain and repair them, as compensation.

No. Seriously. The fuel in question is normal spacecraft fuel. It's replacement coolant.
The fission plant uses the same amount of fuel, at the same cost (low, low price of free with scoops) as a fusion power plant of the same volume.

 

[Condottiere]

I'm pretty sure I had a reply that definitively stated that High Guard was correct, and it's uses the same fuel and consumption formula as every other fusion reactor.

So, I thought, what the hell, and readjusted my power plant technological tree.

 

[Arkathan]

I'm pretty sure I had a reply that definitively stated that High Guard was correct, and it's uses the same fuel and consumption formula as every other fusion reactor.

So, I thought, what the hell, and readjusted my power plant technological tree.

Must've missed it.

 

[Condottiere]

I had plans for the fission reactor as a long term energy source.

So that went out the window.

And solar power got nerfed, though, to be fair, it was over powered.

 

[Sigtrygg]

No. Seriously. The fuel in question is normal spacecraft fuel. It's replacement coolant.
The fission plant uses the same amount of fuel, at the same cost (low, low price of free with scoops) as a fusion power plant of the same volume.

Why would you build an open cycle fission power plant?

 

[Sigtrygg]

it was over powered.

Wouldn't that depend on surface area, proximity to light source, luminosity of light source, and PV efficiency?