Vacuum rated cargo haulage

phavoc said:
A ship can also simply induce a spin, jettison the tank and let physics fling it away from the ship in addition to the force used during the ejection process. That actually is a better in some ways as the ship itself is not having to counter it's own course as much. Probably pretty easily handled using automatic thrusters, but another thing to consider if you are plotting a jump and your calculations need to be precise.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Do you plot courses better when you are spinning or when you are still? Do you shoot a rifle better when you are spinning or still? Why would you think it is easier to plot a course while spinning than while sitting still? Not only that, but now you have to hit the jump at exactly the right time or you may not even be facing the right way anymore.

Are you actually thinking about these posts or just trying to argue?
 
MasterGwydion said:
Most ships do not have enough power to use the jump drive and the m-drive at the same time.
Click to expand...
Most official ships with Drop Tanks are military and have a lot of power for weapons/shields they (should) with a worst case do it with jump dimming. For many player ships a 1 ton high efficiency battery would cure that deficit.

MasterGwydion said:
Plus, all of the rules for jump tanks are under jump tanks. No amount of fluff about maybe I can use my m-drive. Nope. The jump tanks rule tells everyone exactly how it works mechanically. You can explain it anyway you want, but the truth of the matter is that even if you ship doesn't have an M-drive it has the exact same chances of having an issue with drop tanks as a ship with an M-drive. Why? Because the rules under drop tanks don't say anything other than what they say.
Click to expand...
Subject to change by Mongoose and house rules. Who knows "Mongoose" might read these discussions and modify the rules to match. Stranger things have happened.

You could make the tank 1 ton oversized and when released that ton vents as a rocket (pressure not burning) to move it away improving chance of recovery. The rules don't mention it but there is no reason it couldn't be done.
 
Just because drop tanks HAVE explosive bolts doesn't mean that's the only way to demount them, and it would seem bad design if it was the case. I'm not saying it's a trivial operation to detach them in space, but if you're doing it for safe tank recovery, there's probably a tender of some sorts that has the capacity and expertise to do so. The time taken to safely remove and clear the tanks that way is what prevents the drop tank trick and requires the explosive bolts.

We know from the descriptions of the Gazelle going back to it's original appearance that the fuel CAN be used without dropping the tanks.
 
MarcusIII said:
That's right. Mass was never again tied to Jump drive nor Jump
Click to expand...
I can sort of understand where the change of emphasis comes from.

For a jump capable ship a lot of the hull is going to be full of liquid hydrogen so to define the displacement "ton" as the volume occupied by a ton (of liquid hydrogen) makes sense, especially when the deck plan dimensions are similar if you round up (1.5 x 1.5 x 3 ~ 7 {rounding up} or half a displacement ton)

As to the 100D limit the maths works for the tidal affect for a planet...
 
Recoverable drop tanks are a bad idea.

The next step is a powered drop tank that can maneuver away at reaction drive g thrust levels for a few minutes.

The finality would be a long hose to a refueling station, no jump ship would have to carry its own internal jump fuel ever again.
 
Well, you would need to know how far they have to be distant, and how much time the drop tanks have to reach it.

One option I considered was sticking the drop tanks into the rear like a butt plug, and separation by mutual agreement, the manoeuvre drive pushing both the drop tank away, and moving forward.

The other, same placement, but attaching a tow cable to another spacecraft, accelerating in the other direction.
 
Sigtrygg said:
Recoverable drop tanks are a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Tanks that can only ever be removed by explosions is a worse idea.

Come on, even ejection seats are able to be removed from a cockpit to be replaced when needed for repair or maintenance. Clearly there would be a way to take off a drop tank without having to trigger the explosive bolts.

And this presumes some level of support. A lot of the time (most of the time?) the ship either leaves them in place or does use them for the extra jump anyway.
 
Sigtrygg said:
Recoverable drop tanks are a bad idea.

The next step is a powered drop tank that can maneuver away at reaction drive g thrust levels for a few minutes.
Click to expand...
Yeah, next thing you know Elon is landing his rocket boosters somewhere so that they can be reused! lol. It would be bad for the game though.
Sigtrygg said:
The finality would be a long hose to a refueling station, no jump ship would have to carry its own internal jump fuel ever again.
Click to expand...
I tried the last part. The hoses have to be too long to work. A 50-meter sphere would need 5km of hoses. Couldn't find a way to make it work.
 
Sigtrygg said:
The finality would be a long hose to a refueling station, no jump ship would have to carry its own internal jump fuel ever again.
Click to expand...

During war time that refuelling station would be the first target. Easy to hit at the 100 diameter limit. Whoever controls it controls your ship. "No drop tank for you" and you are out of business. Each megacorp would have its own or cross using licences. The little guys just couldn't use them.

Another explanation why the major corporations make more money than the independents. The independents have to carry the fuel tanks.

Great target for rewritten Xpress boat, it could easily go J6 or higher without carrying jump fuel. Run at high g to pickup another tank (rendezvousing with a high g fuel tank tug makes it even quicker).
 
Fluffy Bunny Feet said:
During war time that refuelling station would be the first target. Easy to hit at the 100 diameter limit. Whoever controls it controls your ship. "No drop tank for you" and you are out of business. Each megacorp would have its own or cross using licences. The little guys just couldn't use them.
Click to expand...
This is always true. Look at the tankers in the Imperial Navy. If they lose a tanker they are screwed. How is this any different?
 
Fluffy Bunny Feet said:
A station can't even try to run away. A tanker can. A new tanker can also fly in from elsewhere.
Click to expand...
You know what the difference is between a Station and a ship in Traveller? Engines. That is it. Even a ship that hasn't turned on it's engines in years is a station until it fires up it's drive. What is a tanker? It is a flying gas station.

1762215323638.png
1762215381556.png
 
There are other differences. Station keeping engines and bridges to name two.

Now can a ship be FUNCTIONALLY a station? Sure. The Lab ship is a perfect example. It could easily make one Jump trip (doing multiple jumps) getting to its destination system and never jumping again in its working life.
 
To be fair, the section mentions "...with a few differences...".

Retro-install a bridge and a bigger M Drive on a station and away you go!

(Upgrading to be Jump-capable is probably a much bigger project)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Drop tank mounted fuel/cargo tanks
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
ProfGrizzlyJon
ProfGrizzlyJon
M
Hero's Pride, 100t Automated Free Trader TL15
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
mavikfelna
M
M
400 ton Trade Pioneer TL9,12,15
Replies
2
Views
400
rinku
R
M
Vargr 400 ton Corsairs TL9, 12 & 14
Replies
0
Views
388
mavikfelna
M
M
400t Advanced Laboratory Ship and Research Pinnace
Replies
2
Views
248
mavikfelna
M
Back
Top