How many X-Boats does it take...

[gylesw]

... to run the X-Boat service.

I count 86 systems with on the X-Boat routes in the Spinward Marches.

X-boat tenders have four X-boat bays so can handle a two connection station by themselves assuming one boat per day (2 in, 2 out), but 20 of the systems have three or four connections, so need two tenders, so that is 106 X-boat tenders on station at any one time.

Allow one spare tender per system. Why? Those babies are jump 1, unless they are at a system where they can't get their annual maintenance, once they get dropped off by a tender tender they stay in-system for their service life and there MUST be a back-up available).

So that's 196. Assume that due to the already high redundancy we can get away with one 20,000 dT X-boat tender tender which carries four x-boat tenders (Jump-4 capable for obvious reasons) and we get a nice round 200 x-boat tenders needing a crew of 1,200, and 245 for the X-boat tender tender, for a fleet of 201 vessels (excluding any type-S and the X-boat tender tenders fuel shuttles and 2x50 dT fighter screen) 1,445 total crew... before the X-boats.

As we have about 106 connections, we have 212 X-boats jumping each day (one each way) for a total requirement to keep a one-boat-a-day service of 1484 X-boats. Add another 212 being serviced at any one time, and another 106 kept in reserve, and we have 1,802 X-boats and 1,802 pilots.

So, 1 X-boat tender tender, 200 X-boat tenders, 1,802 X-boats. Assume c. 6 weeks leave/sickness for crew and that 3,871. For a backwater.

That's 11,000MCr for the X-boat tender tender, 55,000MCr for the X-boat tenders and 127,942MCr for the X-boats for 193,942MCr cost. So, say 200,000MCr for hardware and 20,000MCr for maintenance each year.

More populous sectors could require 300,000MCr/30,000MCr per annum, and the total X-boat service could amount to 35 X-boat tender tenders, 5,000 X-boat tenders and 50,000 X-boats, about 90,000 crew and a budget of over 800,000MCr per year.

I suppose what I am wondering is, given that 'too much money in Military budgets' is an archetypical issue in the OTU, does that help?

That and missiles, but that's another post...

Oh, hi, first post, not played Traveller in 30 years or so, just been enjoying going down memory lane.

 

[aramis]

6 Weeks leave per year? I doubt it.
4, perhaps. (Most Americans only get 2 weeks annual leave, often unpaid, and paid sick leave is usually the same or less.)

 

[Vargas]

It may be possible that in some systems IISS uses tugs to ferry X-boats to and from an orbital station where refueling and servicing is done. Leasing local tugs would require less of a capital investment from the TI.

 

[rancke]

That's 11,000MCr for the X-boat tender tender, 55,000MCr for the X-boat tenders and 127,942MCr for the X-boats for 193,942MCr cost. So, say 200,000MCr for hardware and 20,000MCr for maintenance each year.

More populous sectors could require 300,000MCr/30,000MCr per annum, and the total X-boat service could amount to 35 X-boat tender tenders, 5,000 X-boat tenders and 50,000 X-boats, about 90,000 crew and a budget of over 800,000MCr per year.

I suppose what I am wondering is, given that 'too much money in Military budgets' is an archetypical issue in the OTU, does that help?

I don't think so. An average sector has (estimate base on various assumption) 7.5 million tons of combat vessels (combattants of 20,000T and above); this figure does not include auxiliaries and combattants under 20,000T. The total number of fleet personnel is (again based on various assumptions) around 300,000. Your guesstimate of 90,000 crew is impressive, especially since you don't seem to have included support (groundside) personnel, but personnel weighs far less (by a factor 80 or 100) in the budgets of Traveller space organizations because the ships cost a lot more more per crew slot than for 21st Century wet navies.


Hans

 

[Spinward Scout]

As we have about 106 connections, we have 212 X-boats jumping each day (one each way) for a total requirement to keep a one-boat-a-day service of 1484 X-boats. Add another 212 being serviced at any one time, and another 106 kept in reserve, and we have 1,802 X-boats and 1,802 pilots.

You're leaving out losing X-Boats to misjumps, piracy, and accidents.

 

[Vargas]

You're leaving out losing X-Boats to misjumps, piracy, and accidents.

As well as ones needed for training purposes (for pilots and maintainers as well as for tender crew training) and, in a more "realistic" setting, dedicated test units should the Imperium want to develop and test mods. Admittedly, the numbers needed for these purposes are small in comparison to those in service but they are there nonetheless.

Despite the expense, there will also be "extras" to pick up the slack when ships go "into the shop" or are delayed being moved through the system.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Unless that's what the '106 kept in reserve' is for.

 

[inexorabletash]

Oh, hi, first post, not played Traveller in 30 years or so, just been enjoying going down memory lane.

Welcome! You may fit in well here...

 

[Patron Zero]

It may be possible that in some systems IISS uses tugs to ferry X-boats to and from an orbital station where refueling and servicing is done. Leasing local tugs would require less of a capital investment from the TI.

I've been tinkering-tacking something that would keep the ferry-tug 'contracts' in-house with the ISS, still sorting out some bugs but think the idea is sound.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=477924&postcount=13

 

[Ulsyus]

6 Weeks leave per year? I doubt it.
4, perhaps. (Most Americans only get 2 weeks annual leave, often unpaid, and paid sick leave is usually the same or less.)

A lot of jobs that require personnel to be away for extended periods of time carry a higher leave liability. Given an X-boat pilot would be gone for 2 and a bit weeks straight if they did a short-time turnaround on their jump route, and if they had 2 days off on arriving back at their starting point, then that's a lot of work time built up. In transit they'll be busy with routine maintenance and systems checks for a fair chunk of their time, but the point is they're away.

It's not exciting and adventurous like other parts of the IISS (There goes Dave the postman! Hey Dave, when're you going to transfer to the REAL Scouts & stop delivering mail?!?) so people would be less likely to do it for the travel & adventure. From and OHS/WHS perspective pilots would need a chunk of reintegration time back home, so they could be looking at either longer breaks between jump runs or more leave.

How much time off to guys who work on oil rigs get? What about international airline pilots? Would a better analogy be merchant seamen?

 

[Patron Zero]

One thing I've often wonder is why a commercial-private sector outfit has not attempted to 'compete' with the ISS X-boat network ?

Start-up cost acknowledged concerning 'state of the art' express boats but recruiting personnel to staff said venture would be no major issue. One might expect a star-faring version of UPS-FedX to emerge to cover the niche routes that the ISS operate at great cost, not to mention the delay in said deliveries.

One other consideration might be the automation of express boats to increase the frequency of information dispersal in said network. A given that tenders and maintenance facilities will always have 'live' staffing but is not having a pilot aboard a ship traveling in such a 'closed' route a bit redundant given current AI and related navigational technologies ?

Autonomous X-boats would allow for increasing the onboard capacity for data storage and small parcel cargo that formerly supported the crew, perhaps even allowing for an upgrade in J-drive performance to extend range and endurance.

 

[Spinward Scout]

How much time off to guys who work on oil rigs get? What about international airline pilots? Would a better analogy be merchant seamen?

It's a bit different than regular work away from home. The week in Jumpspace, there isn't any work at all. So the X-Boat Pilot is essentially on a vacation from the universe for a week at a time.

Here's a thread I started a while back that might explain a little better.

52 weeks (or How boring is Jumpspace)

 

[aramis]

A lot of jobs that require personnel to be away for extended periods of time carry a higher leave liability. Given an X-boat pilot would be gone for 2 and a bit weeks straight if they did a short-time turnaround on their jump route, and if they had 2 days off on arriving back at their starting point, then that's a lot of work time built up. In transit they'll be busy with routine maintenance and systems checks for a fair chunk of their time, but the point is they're away.

It's not exciting and adventurous like other parts of the IISS (There goes Dave the postman! Hey Dave, when're you going to transfer to the REAL Scouts & stop delivering mail?!?) so people would be less likely to do it for the travel & adventure. From and OHS/WHS perspective pilots would need a chunk of reintegration time back home, so they could be looking at either longer breaks between jump runs or more leave.

How much time off to guys who work on oil rigs get? What about international airline pilots? Would a better analogy be merchant seamen?

Most of the commercial fishermen I know work 4 weeks underway, 1 in port, 1 off. The one in port is about 4 days prior and 3 days after the underway.
That's a 1/6 time schedule. They get a solid month off once a year. So, yeah, they're getting a total of about 2 months off, but don't have weekends.

The north slope guys typically work 2 on, 2 off, or 4 on, 2 off. (Getting the longer shifts requires seniority; conversely, guys who don't pull their weight don't get a third cycle.) My grandfather worked on the slope when I was in grades K to 2. I've a number of friends who worked Kuparuc. Underwarter welders get the option of 1 on 1 off. Deep compressed divers work a week, decompress a week, and have 2 off. (Yes, they stay "deep" for up to a week. They come up in a sealed bell at depth, and stay that way. Safer than decompression according to the weld inspector I know. He complained about being in a can for three weeks... and made more than $80k for that job. I don't know exactly where it was, but it was a chopper from Barrow.)

But, given the crew needs for X-boats and the character gen issues... you're going to need an average of 2 crew already per X-boat, and you probably going to give them every 3rd week off, but no solid leave block longer. (There are good skill retention reasons for limiting annual leave to no more than 4 weeks per vacation. )

So, if you're figuring 50k xboats, you need probably 150K scouts to man them. If you add any extensive annual leave, 2 weeks or more, you're going to need almost a full extra watch - so about 200K, not counting tender crews.

Note that the skill most needed for an X-boat is Engineering. The Skill every scout has is pilot. Houston, we have a problem.

 

[gylesw]

Thanks for all your comments.

Well, with the figures Hans quoted, the X-boat service wouldn't appear to be a bank-breaking thing (I didn't include ground-side staff as I assumed they would share the normal IISS services).

They were minima, as people have rightly pointed out though.

Vargas mentioned tugs. Funny you should mention that; playing with the whole idea I wrote this; adding tugs to do the 'pitching' would make it easier.

X-boat tenders typically have a ‘set station’ well outside any 100d limit at a Lagrane point. Commercial ships are expected to maintain 100,000km separation from this orbit.

When an X-boat is ready to depart, the X-boat tender will manoeuvre so that the X-boat has the correct vector to arrive with near-zero relative velocity to the set station of the tender in the destination system. This is always done in space ‘above’ the orbital plane, with the X-boat’s destination always being set for ‘below’ the orbital plane. The chance of any collision is in any case extremely low, but this helps reduce it.

When the tender reaches the desired vector, the X-boat is un-docked and the tender manoeuvres away. The time the tender will undock is calculable, as is the time it will take for the tender to manoeuvre to 100d separation, the instant that Jump will be initiated will be known within seconds and the Jump pre-programmed, allowing 50% of X-boats to arrive in a 10,000km cube with the aforementioned zero relative velocity to the target system’s tender. The whole process of vector-matching, undocking, and precisely timed Jump is termed ‘pitching’, and a great deal of professional pride rests on the record of a tender and individual X-boat pilots. Arriving in the target box is termed ‘a hit’. Arriving within 100,000km outside the box is termed ‘a strike’, arriving within a million km of the box is a ‘double strike’. Further than that is called a ‘foul ball’. Ex-scout service members tend to carry on using these terms.

Incoming X-boats will normally have no or low relative velocity to the tender’s set station. If the tender is manoeuvring to pitch an outbound X-boat, it will immediately establish a secure comms link with the tender and begin transmission. Once a tender is free it will manoeuvre and dock with the incoming X-boat. This is naturally called a ‘catch’.

In addition to any X-boats carried internally, normally (at least in fringe systems) at least one X-boat will be manned, fuelled and in orbit at set station with the tender. This X-boat remains on set-station whilst the tender pitches and catches. This X-boat can depart within the hour if an emergency communications are received, but will have whatever vector it has inherent from the set station, so will normally arrive at the destination system with some relative velocity with regard to that systems set station.​

Patron Zero and Aramis; maybe the actual X-Boat pilots are civilian contractors? That way we have 'posties', Pilot-0 and Engineering-1 jump monkies, who are typically supplied to the IISS by a contractor. Solves the skill and private sector issues. Kinda

 

[Ulsyus]

Note that the skill most needed for an X-boat is Engineering. The Skill every scout has is pilot. Houston, we have a problem.

Alright, so there's a fairly big overhead for crews, and they need a lot of engineers. If they've got two weeks on then one week off, plus two weeks block leave annually (you guys'd faint if you saw what I got) then the working conditions aren't fantastic, but they're not too bad. So attracting a workforce of engineers, and retaining them for the network, becomes problematic. What if the IISS offers engineering scholarships to promising young applicants from various worlds? All tertiary education fees paid for plus a living stipend (unless they're brigaded in an IISS college on Rhylanor or somesuch) and at the end they have a return-of-service obligation of eight years, four of which must be served in the X-Boat network. The X-boats are serviced constantly and should be in good shape, so rookie engineers can manage them on Jumps, leading to more experienced engineers able to operate other vessels in other branches when they're permitted to move out of the Network. Or they take a retention bonus for another 4 years in the Network, at which point they could move over to the tenders for static engineering positions which allow for quality-of-life changes and helps keep experienced engineers in the Network.

What other ways to you see the Network attracting and retaining engineers?