MGT Only: 200-ton modular far trader

[Brandon C]

The Type AM is an attempt to have a more flexible ship that can b customized to specific custom needs. It can use standard modules from the 50-ton cutter. Small trader lines will have a few of each modules normally used in commercial service at each starport it serves, switching out modules as needed. Some companies lease modules to independent traders if they are travelling between certain worlds.

The most common modules carried are two cargo (see below) and one passenger (see below). The two main shortcomings are that no single cargo item can be larger than 30 tons and the passenger module carriers one less passenger than the normal far trader (although the basic modular trader has a free stateroom available for a passenger if required).

The modular trader has maneuver drive A, jump drive B and power plant B, giving 1G acceleration and Jump 2. Fuel tankage of 44 tons provides for one jump-2 and four weeks of operation. There are two fuel processors. The bridge is equipped with a Model 1/bis computer and basic civilian sensors. There are five staterooms and no low berths. The ship has two hardpoints and two double turrets, but the ship is unarmed. It has sockets for three 30-ton modules and has 2 tons of cargo. Repair drones are installed. An air/raft is carried. The ship is streamlined.

The modular far trader has a crew of four: pilot, medic, engineer and steward. The ship costs MCr 59.77.

New modules

Cargo module: This has space for 30 tons of cargo. MCr 1.43

Passenger module: This is intended for the long-term transport of passengers. It has 5 staterooms, 6 low berths, a common room (briefing room) and 3 tons of cargo. MCr 5.93.

 

[McPerth]

See that if well built, those modules can be used in larger ships (just packing more of them to the ship), in a way not unlike RW cargo containers...

 

[Brandon C]

See that if well built, those modules can be used in larger ships (just packing more of them to the ship), in a way not unlike RW cargo containers...

Yep. I'm working on a 400-ton modular merchant right now.

Another thing that occurred to me is that if modular traders were common enough, some people might own a (luxury) passenger module and just rent space on a ship.

 

[coliver988]

Yep. I'm working on a 400-ton modular merchant right now.

Another thing that occurred to me is that if modular traders were common enough, some people might own a (luxury) passenger module and just rent space on a ship.

Do a search for cargo containers converted to housing - there are a lot of interesting floor plans for 20 & 40 foot cargo containers repurposed as housing of various sorts. Do an image search and instant deck plans. Then just add additional life support connectors and you could have self-sufficient travel pods to the stars. Just rent your space on the ship.

 

[atpollard]

The limiting factor will be that a 30 dTon cylinder is an inefficient shape for stacking and filling with palatalized cargo. They will never fit neatly with Traveller's 1.5 meter deckplan grid 3 meter ceilings.

 

[Brandon C]

The limiting factor will be that a 30 dTon cylinder is an inefficient shape for stacking and filling with palatalized cargo. They will never fit neatly with Traveller's 1.5 meter deckplan grid 3 meter ceilings.

The ship doesn't carry them as stacks in the hold. It carries them as part of the ship, like the modular cutter carries it's module.

 

[atpollard]

The ship doesn't carry them as stacks in the hold. It carries them as part of the ship, like the modular cutter carries it's module.

Ultimately, it will still be less efficient to fit 30 dTons of 'staterooms' in a cylinder than to fit 30 dTons of 'staterooms' on a box. Draw it, if you don't believe me and pay attention to how wide the floor is and where people will hit their head on the ceiling. A section will help immensely. There will also be lots of strange little partial segmented spaces left over.

These curved spaced will also be a poor fit for shipping anything in pre-packaged quantities. Let's pick Cell Phones as a product to ship from planet A to planet B. So I place the cell phone in a box, then place the box in a handy carton, then load cartons on a pallet, then use a grav forklift to load the pallet into a truck (notice that so far, everything has been rectangular in shape so it stacks easily). Now I want to transfer the pallet from the truck to the standard 30 dTon cutter module. Assuming that the pallets are optimized to fit in the cutter, I can load about 19 dTons of pallets in a 30 dTon cutter module ... about 37 percent of the space will be lost fitting a square block in a round hole. Now I could just dump the pallets, open the cases and pour loose boxes of cell phones into the Module ... allowing somewhere in the range of 24 to 27 dTons of cell phones to fit in the 30 dTon cargo Module, but hand loading and unloading individual boxes seems like a step backwards in technology.

My complaint is with the inefficiency of the shape of the module itself, not how it can be connected to a ship. Shipping containers are boxes, not cylinders, for a reason.

 

[aramis]

The ship doesn't carry them as stacks in the hold. It carries them as part of the ship, like the modular cutter carries it's module.

It's still far less efficient than carrying them as boxes.
Cargo can be broken down into several large kinds of things:
Bulk solids, Bulk Liquids, Bulk Gasses, break bulk (boxes or tanks), palletized, and containerized.

Bulk solids do all right in most convex-shaped spaces; nooks and crannies leave areas for cross contamination. This is used mostly in dump truck, dump trailers, and train hopper cars.

Bulk Liquids usually go in cylinders. Nature of the beast.

Bulk gasses almost always go in high pressure cylinders. It's how you get enough in to matter.

Breakbulk works best in regular solid spaces, and boxes are the most efficient - least loss of space. Something like 30% of all shipping goes breakbulk.

Containerized is about 65% of shipping. Compressed gasses or bulk liquids in tanks with container frames, bulk solids in framed and capped hoppers, break bulk in boxes inside the container.

Simple mathematical stacking results in optimum efficiency in rectangular solids. Period. Anything else is less efficient.

 

[Brandon C]

This is why I haven't bothered with deck plans since the 1980's. They interfere with play more than enhance it.

If you don''t like cylindrical modules, make them rectangular.

 

[wbyrd]

This is why I haven't bothered with deck plans since the 1980's. They interfere with play more than enhances it.

If you don''t like cylindrical modules, make them rectangular.

ya know the more you post the happier I am I submitted my manuscript a year ago.....we have a LOT of the same ideas.... I'd be worried someone would think I was ripping you off if my catalog hadn't been already turned in

I lkie the idea, and can see both sides of the module shape issue....
Sometimes deck plans, descriptions, and illustrations don't fit in with a players view of how things should work...

I personally try to give myself some wiggle room.to head off a few problems by adding a bit of fluff text such as " While modules are manufactured in a number of configurations, the most common is a cylinder. However no matter the shape of the module, common lock down points, and attachment hardware, allow a majority of modules to be carried by the AM type."

It could also be stated "That several companies manufacture AM types. Each with their own designs, and layouts. " that way your design just becomes one of a family of ships...each one having it's own layout.

so if someone wants it to look like


a streamlined version of that ship, or something else they can just substitute out images, and draw their own decklans.

Not to say your idea isn't damn spiffy. Just a hint on dealing with a pretty common issue when putting things up for other people to see.

 

[flykiller]

I like that design. great for lifters bringing cargo to non-streamlined cargo ships. hover, snatch, lift, approach/grip, drop, return for more.

 

[aramis]

Not to say your idea isn't damn spiffy. Just a hint on dealing with a pretty common issue when putting things up for other people to see.

Love that Colonial Movers ship (from oBSG)... for a deep space design, it's pretty good. Hate to think about landing it, tho'.

 

[wbyrd]

Love that Colonial Movers ship (from oBSG)... for a deep space design, it's pretty good. Hate to think about landing it, tho'.

I iagine it would be a very, very slow process...... or helped out by tugs, bring cargo up from ground base.

The idea of a modular cargo ship just seems to be a good fit for most games. the details might get sticky at times...but it's a solid idea.

 

[Condottiere]

 

[GypsyComet]

I'm partial to the Salamander Modular A2 from QLI's "The Gabriel Enigma".

 

[wbyrd]

From al the examples in movies and games, I think the OP has the right general idea. And his design works.

 

[Redcap]

I tend to agree as well...

*static* "Want to carry less cargo and more expensive passengers? Easy. Install our handy-dandy standard Modular High Passenger Cargo Deck Modules: Just hook up the PCAL (Power-Comms-Atmo-Liquids) connectors, and away you go! Each module comes with it's share of corridor and ceiling flats, all you do is bolt two or more together, add a secure wall and iris plate, and presto, more passengers! A snip at 5MCr each at your local Cabins'r'Us store at all major starports! (must be annually serviced by our tech reps, local and Imperial sales tax must be paid, SPA does not guarantee custom to your door, may not fit some models of A2 Fat Trader.)" *static*

Seriously, it's a neat idea. I like it

 

[GypsyComet]

From al the examples in movies and games, I think the OP has the right general idea. And his design works.

Is there a picture?

This is why I haven't bothered with deck plans since the 1980's. They interfere with play more than enhance it.

We're just going to have to disagree on that point.

 

[wbyrd]

Is there a picture?

if he doesn't have one, I'd love to make one for him It would be good practice.

 

[Brandon C]

if he doesn't have one, I'd love to make one for him It would be good practice.

No, I don't have one.