expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(22 Aug 2014 16:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(22 Aug 2014 19:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(22 Aug 2014 19:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Bruce Johnson
(22 Aug 2014 20:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(22 Aug 2014 20:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(22 Aug 2014 20:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(22 Aug 2014 21:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(22 Aug 2014 21:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(22 Aug 2014 22:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(22 Aug 2014 23:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(23 Aug 2014 08:29 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 00:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(23 Aug 2014 02:26 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Joseph Hallare
(23 Aug 2014 06:10 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(23 Aug 2014 23:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(24 Aug 2014 00:26 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 14:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(24 Aug 2014 22:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(24 Aug 2014 22:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 23:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 22:56 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(25 Aug 2014 00:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 05:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(25 Aug 2014 03:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(25 Aug 2014 03:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(25 Aug 2014 04:03 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(25 Aug 2014 04:13 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(25 Aug 2014 04:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 05:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(25 Aug 2014 06:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic Phil Pugliese (25 Aug 2014 14:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(26 Aug 2014 00:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(26 Aug 2014 00:25 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] expected ship traffic
Anthony Jackson
(26 Aug 2014 21:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(26 Aug 2014 21:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(26 Aug 2014 04:10 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(26 Aug 2014 05:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(26 Aug 2014 13:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(26 Aug 2014 15:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(27 Aug 2014 04:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(27 Aug 2014 20:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Bruce Johnson
(25 Aug 2014 14:28 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 14:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Bruce Johnson
(25 Aug 2014 16:20 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(25 Aug 2014 16:42 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 19:22 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(25 Aug 2014 19:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 20:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kelly St. Clair
(25 Aug 2014 19:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 20:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(25 Aug 2014 20:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 21:30 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Bruce Johnson
(25 Aug 2014 20:43 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 21:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(26 Aug 2014 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(26 Aug 2014 00:26 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(26 Aug 2014 00:29 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(26 Aug 2014 00:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(25 Aug 2014 16:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(25 Aug 2014 17:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
David Shaw
(25 Aug 2014 18:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Bruce Johnson
(25 Aug 2014 20:17 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 21:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(25 Aug 2014 21:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 21:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kurt Feltenberger
(25 Aug 2014 21:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kurt Feltenberger
(25 Aug 2014 21:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(26 Aug 2014 13:35 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
John Geoffrey
(26 Aug 2014 14:19 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(26 Aug 2014 14:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
John Geoffrey
(26 Aug 2014 14:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(27 Aug 2014 02:35 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kurt Feltenberger
(27 Aug 2014 02:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(27 Aug 2014 13:03 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(27 Aug 2014 19:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(27 Aug 2014 20:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(27 Aug 2014 21:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(28 Aug 2014 13:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(28 Aug 2014 13:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(28 Aug 2014 14:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
John Geoffrey
(28 Aug 2014 14:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(28 Aug 2014 14:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(29 Aug 2014 07:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(28 Aug 2014 20:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kelly St. Clair
(27 Aug 2014 05:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(27 Aug 2014 19:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(29 Aug 2014 19:29 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 19:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
William Ewing
(27 Aug 2014 20:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(27 Aug 2014 20:10 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Jeffrey Schwartz
(27 Aug 2014 20:17 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(27 Aug 2014 20:28 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(29 Aug 2014 19:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Andrew Long
(27 Aug 2014 20:52 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(27 Aug 2014 21:54 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(25 Aug 2014 06:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Richard Aiken
(24 Aug 2014 06:35 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(24 Aug 2014 06:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Richard Aiken
(01 Sep 2014 00:29 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(01 Sep 2014 02:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Richard Aiken
(02 Sep 2014 00:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(02 Sep 2014 00:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(24 Aug 2014 07:54 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(24 Aug 2014 08:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(24 Aug 2014 08:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 15:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
William Ewing
(27 Aug 2014 19:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 22:35 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(24 Aug 2014 22:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 23:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Thomas Jones-Low
(22 Aug 2014 20:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Greg Chalik
(22 Aug 2014 21:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Thomas Jones-Low
(22 Aug 2014 21:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(22 Aug 2014 21:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 00:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(24 Aug 2014 15:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(23 Aug 2014 07:36 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(23 Aug 2014 08:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kelly St. Clair
(23 Aug 2014 09:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Kelly St. Clair
(23 Aug 2014 09:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Timothy Collinson
(23 Aug 2014 11:19 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Tim
(23 Aug 2014 11:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(23 Aug 2014 23:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Phil Pugliese
(23 Aug 2014 23:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Freelance Traveller
(27 Aug 2014 22:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Ian Whitchurch
(27 Aug 2014 23:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Craig Berry
(27 Aug 2014 23:43 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
John Geoffrey
(28 Aug 2014 12:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] expected ship traffic
Richard Aiken
(29 Aug 2014 13:30 UTC)
|
Well, first off FF&S2 is NOT CT. My major point is that MT 'folded, bent, spindled, & mutilated' CT in a way that was completely unnecessary as the system worked just fine except that, in this case, amongst many other changes DGP fomented, they found it desirable to 'pump up the volume' wrt trade. The FF&S's were a gearheads dream but a nightmare of complication w/ all sorts of problems that were detailed on this very list many years ago. I don't doubt that FF&S will yield figures that support MegaTrav's 'MegaTrade' as I imagine that that was exactly what it was designed to do, amongst other things I believe that 1000dT J2 merchantman could handle the trade from Oz'. About 280-300 trips/year. And w/ the increased flexibility that more ships would provide. Sending out a few monster loads a year does have disadvantages in that respect. Even if all that meat is going to just one destination? Which I would doubt. And this volume could definitely be handled by larger merchantmen w/ even higher cargo cap. And that's *If* such a trade could really be sustained in the TU, which I doubt as, unlike the Earth the TU is not bound by an upper TL limit of 8 or 9. Which I believe changes things quite a bit. As I've said before the analog 'tween the TU & current conditions here on Earth is NOT, & in fact, can NOT, be exact. p.s. hasn't OZ' become much more industrialized than it was 100 years ago? How about 150 or 200 years ago? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/24/14, Ian Whitchurch <ian.whitchurch@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [TML] expected ship traffic To: tml@simplelists.com Date: Sunday, August 24, 2014, 11:24 PM Phil, The fuel purifiers and scoops make roughly zero difference to the economics of the ship - they are within the 1% "slop" thats gone to self-defense and that doesnt really change the economics of the ship at all (plus here for Andrew Vallance's High Guard ship creation program). Yes, you have reservations about whether this ship is required, because you dont understand just how much volume of stuff worlds produce - lets take, for example, the Tasmanian beef industry. http://www.kingisland.tas.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/KIAFSG%20final%20report%2017%20Jun.pdf Lets assume that, somewhere, there are people with a taste for Tasmanain beef, and are willing to pay Imperial Credits to get it. One imperial credit per kilo, in fact. Call it 1000 kilos per m3, and call it KCr10 per dton. At least per FFS2, it's easily going to be cheaper to import meat at a Cr1 per kilo than it is to upgrade your life support system to produce meat. With CT, it's *handwave* *handwave* "life support costs" *handwave*. Now,Tasmanian cattle farmers are currently being paid roughly $4000/ton for their beef ... in local currency, which doesnt buy starships, hitech weaponery and all the other things a TL8 culture wants. Trust me, in Imperial Credits, you'd be paying Cr400 a ton, maximum, or KCr 4 a dton (and check the CT-canon exchange rates in Trillion Credit Squadron or Striker for some not-bad numbers). Tasmania exported 24 kilotons of beef last year, plus 7 kilotons of sheep meat. Thats 31 kton, or call it 3100 dtons. Lets see, a 200dton Far Trader a week, moving 80 dtons or so, moves that with some space left over. On the other hand, Australia exported 1.4 megatons, or 140 000 dtons. Remember, this is just beef and sheep meat going from an Ag planet to non-Ag planets. No minerals. No booze, No grain. Nothing else. From what we know of trade patterns now, just the meat trade, going from an Ag world to various worlds without biospheres, at a target price to the customer of ICr1 per kilo, will be enough to support multi-kiloton cargo ships. On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Phil Pugliese (via tml list) <nobody@simplelists.com> wrote: This email was sent from yahoo.com which does not allow forwarding of emails via email lists. Therefore the sender's email address (philpugliese@yahoo.com) has been replaced with a dummy one. The original message follows: I don't think a 10kTon ship w/ 6kTon cargo is really in the same class as the immense bulk carriers I recall from MT. I certainly would NOT call it that. But, I think that it could qualify as a 'massive' commercial vessel. I also would have reservations about whether or not a commercial vessel this large would really be required. But, if it was, I don't think there'd be much need for an armed version as I would doubt that it would be needed to service anything other than established hi-pop worlds. I'd also dispense w/ the fuel scoops & purification plant. IMO, though, there would be more demand for passenger space & so I'd swap reduce cargo space accordingly & also have J2 & J3 versions. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/24/14, Ian Whitchurch <ian.whitchurch@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [TML] expected ship traffic To: tml@simplelists.com Date: Sunday, August 24, 2014, 8:32 PM One reason massive military starships exist in Classis Trav is because size is an important defense in High Guard, because of the "automatic criticals is size smaller than weapon factor" rule. Lets take, for example, this commercial starship Ship: Jacques CoeurClass: ConsignerType: Cargo HaulerArchitect: Iniigi TalanakaTech Level: 11 USP AK-K521243-070000-80007-0 MCr 4,220.919 10 KTonsBat Bear 5 1 1 Crew: 66Bat 5 1 1 TL: 11 Cargo: 6,045 Passengers: 12 Low: 30 Emergency Low: 80 Fuel: 2,200 EP: 200 Agility: 1 Shipboard Security Detail: 10Craft: 1 x 50T NoneFuel Treatment: Fuel Scoops and On Board Fuel Purification Backups: 1 x Model/4 Computer Architects Fee: MCr 42.209 Cost in Quantity: MCr 3,376.735 It'll shrug off a lot of laser fire. On the other hand, it's fac 8 missile bay will break a small pirate in half - and thats only allocating about 1% of ship volume to defense, the equivalents of 2 turrets on a 200 dton ship. This ship is more-or-less self-escorting, and still comes in at 60% cargo by volume at jump-2, and has 1 crewman per 100 dtons of cargo ... while built at TL11. ----- The Traveller Mailing List Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml Report problems to listmom@travellercentral.com To unsubscribe from this list please goto http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=Qjs81DnfPhuRQ7Rw3I0XVltos3d36yjy ----- The Traveller Mailing List Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml Report problems to listmom@travellercentral.com To unsubscribe from this list please goto http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=EwREIRgLK8vaUEhNlnoNdSGKwnjoID8a