Economic Ramifications of Collector Jump on the Tramp Trade

[Ackehece]

Collectors could be used for trade on Jump-1 mains if you used them as Jump ships.

Strip out M drives (which has the benefit of shrinking the power plant as well and freeing up space) and the ship loiters at edge of the 100D main world limit. It charges up over the week and doesn't have to bother with extending/stowing the canopy as it never accelerates.

STL ships or Barge modules arrive and dock with it and pay their 'Jump fee'. When full it jumps to the next system, disembarks the barges and recharges again for the return trip. The benefits are a fairly regular schedule (as opposed to tramps), massive savings in fuel, lots of extra space to move things.

I see them a lot like the old Jump ships in MechWarrior. They even have the giant solar collector trailing behind them.

My Thoughts:

• Would it be economic?
  
  • higher tech levels = higher maintenance costs
  • requires higher tech level starports for repairs
  • is the increased cost maintenance and canopy replacement offset by the lower fuel costs?
  • added cargo tonnage?
• would this type of run be automated?
  
  • post virus
• Tenders Carried by the ship or local and waiting at jump in point (assuming no scatter)?
• Why not a direct M-Drive for total Self Sufficiency?
  
  • would players choose this as a standard player ship?
  • why or why not?
• How about higher TL versions? J3 ?

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

My thoughts on your thoughts.

My Thoughts:
Would it be economic?

Well, since I think can assume at least some technological advancement in the 800 or so years since the OTU of the Golden Age, I would say yes.

higher tech levels = higher maintenance costs

See above, what was once high tech may well be more common. Also, could be easier to maintain than a standard overclocked fusion plant.

requires higher tech level starports for repairs

Again, I think that there should be some increase of TL over all and thus not quite the issue as in the Golden Age, but that is just me guessing.

is the increased cost maintenance and canopy replacement offset by the lower fuel costs?

I wish Hans were here to field that one, but considering the cost of a tank of gas, seems like it might be. Plus has the advantage of being able to absorb those exotic particles it uses anywhere in space is mighty nice come a misjump to those empty hexes.

added cargo tonnage?

Always a bonus, spare tonnage, which in the hands of naval architect is also more components in other systems, like sensors or even defenses. Mmmm, Nuke Dampers and Meson Screens for the Free Trader. Yum.

would this type of run be automated?

Don't see why not if AIs get to be Citizens, they might even be better at it than organics.

post virus
Tenders Carried by the ship or local and waiting at jump in point (assuming no scatter)?

If no scatter then we are taking Jump and Hop only in which case Manuever-1 for emergencies and they sit at their assigned Jump Point and Tenders bring cargo and pax to them.

Why not a direct M-Drive for total Self Sufficiency?

Not sure I understand this one. Could you explain it to me?

would players choose this as a standard player ship?
why or why not?

Depends, I suspect some of my crowd might figure out the utility of the Collectors. These are the same guys who stock up on power cells like they were kids in a candy store and ask wacky questions like "Can I shoot nukes at my own BG to power my Jump Capacitors? And speaking of BGs, can I teleport nukes past them? It's relevant.", so once they figure out what a Collector is and does, and worse the exploit of no jump fuel, yeah, I suspect one of them will opt for a Collector or two.

I am think of putting them on some of my Naval vessels now, thanks to this discussion. Might have to boot up Rob's Shipyard again.

How about higher TL versions? J3 ?

Oops, missed this one. Uh, yes. I mean seems like if you have the TL why not. People think that mining the oort clouds messes with strategic planning Collectors are gonna drive them to the padded cells. :devil:

"Fuel, what is this Fuel you speak of Earth man? my starship is powered by exotic particles, but of that is too difficult to process think of as sunshine and rainbows. *mutters* Primitive."

 

[Ackehece]

Well, since I think can assume at least some technological advancement in the 800 or so years since the OTU of the Golden Age, I would say yes.

We are looking at 16++ as a "standard" as far as I can tell.

See above, what was once high tech may well be more common. Also, could be easier to maintain than a standard overclocked fusion plant.

total replacement every 6 years of usage
related to this rule


"Canopy Degradation. A canopy degrades with use and
rapidly degrades when abused. A canopy functions normally
until it has cycled through 100 charges. Thereafter each
charge cycle after 100 lasts an additional day. The 150th
charge cycle lasts (7+ (150 -100) =) 57 days."

so generally you would want to replace it at the 100 jump mark
​

"After about 150 Charges (perhaps six years of travelling),
the Canopy needs to be replaced at a cost of MCr52.5" <---- this right here is what I would think might make it uneconomic

Again, I think that there should be some increase of TL over all and thus not quite the issue as in the Golden Age, but that is just me guessing.

I would tend to agree

I wish Hans were here to field that one, but considering the cost of a tank of gas, seems like it might be. Plus has the advantage of being able to absorb those exotic particles it uses anywhere in space is mighty nice come a misjump to those empty hexes.

I think that the 52MCr replacement after 100 jumps might be... prohibitive

Always a bonus, spare tonnage, which in the hands of naval architect is also more components in other systems, like sensors or even defenses. Mmmm, Nuke Dampers and Meson Screens for the Free Trader. Yum.

oh yeah.. but with the price I suspect that cargo would have higher priority for that space... (otoh 1dt for nuke damper r5 same for meson screen....)

Don't see why not if AIs get to be Citizens, they might even be better at it than organics.

If no scatter then we are taking Jump and Hop only in which case Manuever-1 for emergencies and they sit at their assigned Jump Point and Tenders bring cargo and pax to them.

so local... why waste the D tonnage on tenders on a fixed route

Not sure I understand this one. Could you explain it to me?

I meant that if it was a player ship - it would need such drives to make it more independent. - sorry was not plain.

Depends, I suspect some of my crowd might figure out the utility of the Collectors. These are the same guys who stock up on power cells like they were kids in a candy store and ask wacky questions like "Can I shoot nukes at my own BG to power my Jump Capacitors? And speaking of BGs, can I teleport nukes past them? It's relevant.", so once they figure out what a Collector is and does, and worse the exploit of no jump fuel, yeah, I suspect one of them will opt for a Collector or two.

again is it economically feasible.. that 100 jump limit really kills it...

I am think of putting them on some of my Naval vessels now, thanks to this discussion. Might have to boot up Rob's Shipyard again.
Oops, missed this one. Uh, yes. I mean seems like if you have the TL why not. People think that mining the oort clouds messes with strategic planning Collectors are gonna drive them to the padded cells. :devil:
"Fuel, what is this Fuel you speak of Earth man? my starship is powered by exotic particles, but of that is too difficult to process think of as sunshine and rainbows. *mutters* Primitive."

:CoW::devil::coffeegulp::coffeesip:

 

[Lycanorukke]

I decided to crunch the numbers for a Jump 1

Jump Drive Space = ((H x J x 5) / 200) +5
Collector Space = (H x C x 10) /200
The J-Drive is about 1/2 the size
But a j-drive need H/10 in space for fuel.

So in reality space used

((H x J x 5) / 200) +5 + (H /10) vs ((H x C x 10) /200 )

For a 1000 ton J1 ship
130 dton vs 50 dton

So you have a saving of 80 dtons in space, which at standard freight rates is 80kCr/Jump. Not too bad.

Pay for fuel -
Using Unrefined as its cheaper = 100Cr Dton.
A 1000 ton J1 will use 10,000Cr in fuel per jump.
Now you have a 90KCr difference.

Assuming 1 Jump per 2 weeks (26 Jumps) thats 2.34 MCr difference
Over 4 Years (collector wearing out) 9.36 MCr
But the collector for 1000 dTon costs ((H x C x 10) /200 ) * 0.5Mcr
Which is 25 MCr.
So you lose money.

1000 Jump 3 vs Collector 3

380 dTons vs 150 dTons
Difference of 230 Dtons which is 230,000 Cr
Fuel = 300,000 Cr
Total 530kCr per Jump.
Year = 13.78MCr, 4 year = 55.12Mcr
Canopy = 75Mcr
Lose money again.

So unless a collector can be 'refurbished' during annual maintenance like a Jump drive (usage reset to zero), the collector does spec trade (double his income), or it is gov subsidised - a collector is a losing option in the longer term.

And once Hop drive starts appearing (1% hull volume fuel) collectors are flat out uneconomical.

 

[aramis]

I decided to crunch the numbers for a Jump 1

Jump Drive Space = ((H x J x 5) / 200) +5
Collector Space = (H x C x 10) /200
The J-Drive is about 1/2 the size
But a j-drive need H/10 in space for fuel.

So in reality space used

((H x J x 5) / 200) +5 + (H /10) vs ((H x C x 10) /200 )

For a 1000 ton J1 ship
130 dton vs 50 dton

So you have a saving of 80 dtons in space, which at standard freight rates is 80kCr/Jump. Not too bad.

Pay for fuel -
Using Unrefined as its cheaper = 100Cr Dton.
A 1000 ton J1 will use 10,000Cr in fuel per jump.
Now you have a 90KCr difference.

Assuming 1 Jump per 2 weeks (26 Jumps) thats 2.34 MCr difference
Over 4 Years (collector wearing out) 9.36 MCr
But the collector for 1000 dTon costs ((H x C x 10) /200 ) * 0.5Mcr
Which is 25 MCr.
So you lose money.

1000 Jump 3 vs Collector 3

380 dTons vs 150 dTons
Difference of 230 Dtons which is 230,000 Cr
Fuel = 300,000 Cr
Total 530kCr per Jump.
Year = 13.78MCr, 4 year = 55.12Mcr
Canopy = 75Mcr
Lose money again.

So unless a collector can be 'refurbished' during annual maintenance like a Jump drive (usage reset to zero), the collector does spec trade (double his income), or it is gov subsidised - a collector is a losing option in the longer term.

And once Hop drive starts appearing (1% hull volume fuel) collectors are flat out uneconomical.

Last draft I saw shows 10% per hop, not 1% (And that's a newer draft than 5.09... but 5.09 shows it as 10% per # as well, for Jump, Hop, and Skip drives. (p 344)

Edit to add: Due to the low scatter, H1 almost completely replaces Jumps the moment you attain a true hop 1 capability... anything under 10 Parsecs, the error is low enough to still hit the inner system or a GG's jump exclusion sphere, and so you simply plot for 10 parsecs in that angle, and drop out 168±17 hours later, at the 100 diameter limit.

 

[Lycanorukke]

Last draft I saw shows 10% per hop, not 1% (And that's a newer draft than 5.09... but 5.09 shows it as 10% per # as well, for Jump, Hop, and Skip drives. (p 344)

My bad, I was using the original hardcopy book.

 

[Ackehece]

So... considering the previous what purpose does a collector have? Backup for a misjump? Strategic invasion potential as per one persons worry? A means to introduce the Annic Nova Alien civilization? Scoutship primary?
I suspect all of the above. Anything I am missing?

For aliens like the ones that developed the AN did they not develop jump fuel based tech? Alternate path to the stars?

We have established that Jump Collector trade would be unfeasible.The initial question in this thread was about tramp trade.... thing we can call a definitive answer on that -God No- no right minded Trader (PC or otherwise) would consider a Trader or any other ship powered by a JCollector if they had a choice.

So that leaves purpose! It does seem that governments could find a use for something that economic forces would not. (1000$ toilet seats).
Maybe there is an art aspect as well? A canopy could be an aesthetic piece?

The ultra rich showing off?
Do we have solar sail M-drives? No... but they would be a worthwhile addition on a collector ship. Sailing the stars! (again ultra rich sport)

 

[robject]

As uneconomical, Collectors don't noticeably change interstellar traffic.

As slow and prone to damage, Collectors don't noticeably change war.

They don't even really change the Xboat system. They might change how Xboats look, and may reduce the loss of ships due to misjump, but not affect performance.

They change exploration and intelligence gathering: an independent explorer can cross a Rift.


Only one thing that I think you missed: with Collectors powering Jump, if you don't have an M-drive, then you don't need a power plant. I am assuming that life support is not necessarily powered by the power plant -- again I might be wrong. Otherwise, no power plant cost, and no "refueling" (deferred to canopy replacement).

However, Collectors are (IIRC) larger than power plants, so I think the engineering staff doesn't really shrink.

 

[Spartan159]

Fusion+ ?

 

[Ackehece]

As uneconomical, Collectors don't noticeably change interstellar traffic.

As slow and prone to damage, Collectors don't noticeably change war.

They don't even really change the Xboat system. They might change how Xboats look, and may reduce the loss of ships due to misjump, but not affect performance.

They change exploration and intelligence gathering: an independent explorer can cross a Rift.


Only one thing that I think you missed: with Collectors powering Jump, if you don't have an M-drive, then you don't need a power plant. I am assuming that life support is not necessarily powered by the power plant -- again I might be wrong. Otherwise, no power plant cost, and no "refueling" (deferred to canopy replacement).

However, Collectors are (IIRC) larger than power plants, so I think the engineering staff doesn't really shrink.

specifically states that collector is for collector use only and does not power anything else...

"Routine Energy Use. A collector is unsuitable as a routine energy supply.(The mechanisms of the ship must be powered by other sources); it only powers the Jump Drive."


Yes it appears that our conclusion from the facts is that Collectors are just that... rare oddball technology that has some uses but not universal changing implications. More something a collector of rare cars would buy but not something that would be regularly fielded.

 

[Spartan159]

Is it worthwhile as an emergency backup system?

 

[robject]

Is it worthwhile as an emergency backup system?

Quite the opposite: a Collector only powers Jump.

I think "oddball" is the right way to picture Collectors.

 

[Ackehece]

Is it worthwhile as an emergency backup system?

as an emergency jump in case the normal jump fails or hop fails? potentially.
as a replacement for other types of energy - not helpful at all.

 

[mike wightman]

The economic unfeasibility argument has long been my argument for why the Annic Nova was considered a curio - the hydrogen powered jump drive is cheaper and so is the preferred option. No need for it to be beyond Imperial technology.

The Annic Nova could have been built by a race that didn't have advanced fusion power generation and so couldn't build the fusion powered jump drives but could build collectors. and less efficient fusion power plants (no fusion+ for them )

I could see collector powered ships also being used by nobles, planetary rulers and megacorp execs as a show of wealth - it would add a bit of diversity and fluff but wouldn't affect the economics at all.

 

[robject]

I like both (ok all three) of your thoughts/suggestions there, Mike.

 

[Spartan159]

as an emergency jump in case the normal jump fails or hop fails? potentially.

This is exactly what I was thinking, misjumps don't usually land you within refueling distance of anything unless you are very lucky.

 

[aramis]

We have established that Jump Collector trade would be unfeasible.T]

Have You? I see little evidence of that.

There is no reason that a collector should not be refurbished exactly like any other drive at overhaul. Which rules out the cost argument... because you still amortize over 40 years like any other drive.

Installing a power plant would be requisite, but is, really, rather trivial.

The collector slows the jump cycle by a day or two, as it needs 7 days with the sails extended. Which does seem to imply that it should use a LASH approach.

It increases cargo tonnage by enough to justify the extra time OR the lash (but not both)

 

[Ackehece]

Have You? I see little evidence of that.

There is no reason that a collector should not be refurbished exactly like any other drive at overhaul. Which rules out the cost argument... because you still amortize over 40 years like any other drive.

Installing a power plant would be requisite, but is, really, rather trivial.

The collector slows the jump cycle by a day or two, as it needs 7 days with the sails extended. Which does seem to imply that it should use a LASH approach.

It increases cargo tonnage by enough to justify the extra time OR the lash (but not both)

Drastically increased maintenance costs. Yes you could still use it, would it be a reasonable choice? probably not.
The canopy should be replaced even with proper maintenance (according to the rules at 150 jumps and anything beyond 100 jumps increases your time between jumps by a day... (57 days at 150 jumps)
so while yes it is worked on in maintenance but replacement has to occur sometime... 57 day charge is pretty insane, can you image at 200 jumps (107 day charge)

og384

Canopy Degradation. A canopy degrades with use and
rapidly degrades when abused. A canopy functions normally
until it has cycled through 100 charges. Thereafter each
charge cycle after 100 lasts an additional day. The 150th
charge cycle lasts (7+ (150 -100) =) 57 days​

pg 384

If equipped with a Collector, it requires one full Charge.
After about 150 Charges (perhaps six years of travelling),
the Canopy needs to be replaced​

optional... but at this point it has a 57 day charge cycle...


You could make a profitable go of it with one, just much more likely to be profitable with a standard jump drive.

 

[Lycanorukke]

There is no reason that a collector should not be refurbished exactly like any other drive at overhaul.

I vaguely remember something in TNE where you could have your ship overhauled as opposed to maintained. IIRC it cost about 1% (though it may have been 10% can't remember exactly) the value of the ship (as opposed to the 0.1% for annual maintenance) which reduced wear value of all components to 5 (50% wear).

If you overhauled your canopy ship every 2 years you could reduce the 'collector usage' to 50. Not as good as a new one (it only lasts 50 more Jumps as opposed to 100) but at a fraction of the cost of a new installation.

 

[Spartan159]

I think this is what you are thinking of, per TNE page 242:
Rebuilds
Vehicles and major starship components may be rebuilt, which reduces their current wear value. The wear value to which a piece of rebuilt equipment may be rebuilt depends on how many times it has been rebuilt. The first time a piece of equipment is rebuilt it may be rebuilt to wear value 1, the second time to a wear value of 2, and so on. A rebuild costs 5% of the original purchase price of the component per wear value reduced. Thus an engine rebuilt from wear value 10 to wear value 5 would cost 25% of its original cost. That same engine rebuilt to wear value 1 would cost 45% of its original cost.

The "overhaul" on page 222 is the regular 0.1% cost / two weeks.