Starports Thomas RUX (18 Aug 2020 19:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (19 Aug 2020 15:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Aug 2020 17:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Kelly St. Clair (19 Aug 2020 17:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (19 Aug 2020 17:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (20 Aug 2020 22:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (21 Aug 2020 10:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (21 Aug 2020 14:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (21 Aug 2020 16:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Rupert Boleyn (21 Aug 2020 18:44 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (22 Aug 2020 02:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Rupert Boleyn (22 Aug 2020 02:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (22 Aug 2020 06:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (22 Aug 2020 14:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (22 Aug 2020 14:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (22 Aug 2020 16:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (22 Aug 2020 21:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 03:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (23 Aug 2020 16:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 18:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (23 Aug 2020 23:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 00:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (24 Aug 2020 00:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (24 Aug 2020 22:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Rupert Boleyn (25 Aug 2020 01:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (25 Aug 2020 03:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (25 Aug 2020 10:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (25 Aug 2020 02:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (25 Aug 2020 10:38 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 18:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 18:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (26 Aug 2020 11:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (26 Aug 2020 12:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (26 Aug 2020 17:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (26 Aug 2020 18:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (26 Aug 2020 20:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (22 Aug 2020 09:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (22 Aug 2020 15:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (22 Aug 2020 16:12 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (22 Aug 2020 21:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 03:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (23 Aug 2020 16:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 18:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (23 Aug 2020 05:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 09:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (23 Aug 2020 09:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (28 Aug 2020 16:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Timothy Collinson (28 Aug 2020 16:53 UTC)
Interstellar Wars Timelines (was Starports) Alex Goodwin (28 Aug 2020 17:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] Interstellar Wars Timelines (was Starports) Thomas RUX (29 Aug 2020 02:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] Interstellar Wars Timelines (was Starports) Kenneth Barns (29 Aug 2020 23:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (26 Aug 2020 16:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Alex Goodwin (26 Aug 2020 18:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (26 Aug 2020 18:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports hemdian (19 Aug 2020 19:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Rupert Boleyn (19 Aug 2020 19:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (19 Aug 2020 20:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (19 Aug 2020 20:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin (19 Aug 2020 21:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas Jones-Low (19 Aug 2020 21:44 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports kaladorn@xxxxxx (19 Aug 2020 22:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (19 Aug 2020 22:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Thomas RUX (20 Aug 2020 02:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] Starports Phil Pugliese (20 Aug 2020 04:22 UTC)

Re: [TML] Starports Jeff Zeitlin 22 Aug 2020 14:18 UTC

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 22:24:33 -0400, xxxxxx@gmail.com wrote:

>That's a broad classification. I was thinking more local to a system itself
>('there's a damaged freighter with a hazardous cargo being salvaged in
>orbit x of planet y and all ships are required to maintain at least 1000 km
>clearance' or 'the primary in this system is experiencing significant
>coronal mass ejections at this time; System Guard recommends all vessels
>within 100 solar diameters review their radiation protocols and equipment,
>have appropriate protective measures immediately available, etc') NOTAMS
>(in an nautical setting) would include some bulletins about navigation aids
>(lights/radio/ranges/etc), weather warnings, issues with anchorages or
>harborages, spills, vessels stuck, adrift, derelict, etc, as well as any
>areas closed to civilian traffic. In a Notice To All Spacers (NOTAMS),
>there might be bulletins about navigational aids, system emergency
>channels/stations, space weather events, navigational hazards, port issues,
>spills, stuck/adrift/derelict vehicles, areas prohibited to civilians,
>information about safe orbits around various planets and satellites, a
>pointer to local information services and dockage, etc.

This sort of NOTAM would more or less _have_ to be handled by either the
SPA at the starport (as opposed to from the central SPA office for the
subsector/sector/Imperium) or some sort of system equivalent to a national
aviation/maritime authority (air NOTAMs in the US are issued by the FAA).
There is no reason that that couldn't be the administrative arm of the
System Guard/Space Police/System Defense Force; the important thing is that
they have both (a) information collection and aggregation capabilities, and
(b) at least nominal authority over system space traffic.

>If the Imperium did run and administer starports (in a fulsome way), this
>would be something they would probably have a hand in. If the system was
>provided by the locals, they may still carry Imperial messages as well as
>the local government and SAR/shipping control/etc notices. The System Guard
>(if such existed) could handle the navaids, NOTAMs, SAR, and some
>assistance to LE (as a platform as the Canadian CG does).

Even if the Imperial SPA effectively leaves it to the system to run the
cession starport (e.g., hires and trains locally, rather than sending in
people from out-system), they'll mandate that it be operated to certain
standards. With a Class A or B port, I would expect that mandate to include
issuing NOTAS (NOtice To All Spacers); it might extend down to Class C
ports as well, almost certainly if there's an orbital component. Class E,
ships are definitely on their own; Class D, YMMV, but don't expect it.

Traffic Control outside what's needed to control and coordinate arrivals
and departures from the actual starport may or may not exist at all, but
won't be an Imperial/SPA function (unless the system requests and pays for
it - if the SPA offers it at all); that's not part of the system's cession
to the Imperium, and is thus still within system control. Ditto SAR, but
there might be a bit more Imperial willingness to participate in this (if
the system sets it up and runs it), as it can legitimately be classed as
commerce protection. If the System Guard/System Defense Force also does
anti-piracy patrols, I could see the Imperium, through the SPA, being
willing, or even eager, to defray major portions of the system's costs for
doing so; if it means that they don't have to send the Navy through as
often on operations (vs. 'show the flag'), that can only be viewed as a
good thing...

>The idea with NOTAMS is that whenever you plan to sail (space) in an area,
>you want all this information (messages take a standard format so scanning
>them can be not too long) and it should be available online or at harbours
>before you set out. In the spacing context, stations/ports would have this
>sort of info, the data net might, and you may well get it directly from the
>beacons/sats/stations used to manage system traffic and to greet visitors.

The standard format also lends itself to some degree of automatic parsing,
which isn't a bad thing - but I would expect that any certifications for
(military or commercial) flight officers (shipmaster, navigator, pilot)
would include being able to read a printout of the raw NOTAS, without
computer parsing/conversion.

®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2020. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.

--
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller
    The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Resource
xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com
http://www.freelancetraveller.com

Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
enterprises for hosting services:

onCloud/CyberWeb Enterprises (http://www.oncloud.io)
The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)