Ship Construction

[Timerover51]

Civilian - hull, controls, drives, fuel, cargo, crew, staterooms, hardpoints for turret weapons, carried craft/vehicles
Military - hull, armour, screens, EW, controls, drives, fuel, fuel treatment (or military spec drives), crew, staterooms, cargo/stores, hardpoints for turret weapons, bay weapons or setting equivalent, spinal mounts or their setting equivalents, carried craft/vehicles, ship's troops

Nice first cut for design. I think what I will do is determine any individual design based on what it is supposed to do. Is it going to be a Free Trader, picking up cargo where it can, delivering it and then looking for more cargo to take somewhere? Is it going to be a liner on a regular route, with guaranteed cargo and passengers at each stop? Is it going to be a small Space Viking raider, optimized for surface raiding? Then, looking at what those ships require, approaching it from the standpoint of building a surface merchant ship and a surface warship, and going from there.

I also need, as Aramis stated, to make sure that the numbers add up for a profitable or near-profitable ship. By near-profitable, I mean a ship that does need to do some speculative trading to keep the bills paid. As the Hyperdrive ships are going to inherently have more cargo capacity, how much more will the drives need to cost to keep Jump Drive ships competitive? As I will be planning for crew on the basis of 3 watches, my crew needs and costs are going to increase as well, by a factor of around 3. More number crunching. But then, such is the life of a ship designer. A ship is simply the result of a large number of trade offs.

 

[Timerover51]

I was looking again at the ship construction rules, and thinking of some changes to be made.

First, the ships take way to long to build. A 5000 dTon ship is listed as taking 428 weeks to build. Converting that into standard Earth years of 52 weeks, that ship is taking over eight years to build, eight times fifty-two equalling 416 weeks. Now, 5000 Traveller dTons equates to about 25,000 Gross Register Tons for a nautical vessel. A World War 2 Liberty Ship, about the equivalent of 1420 Traveller dTons took an average of 9 months to build, in terms of man-hours, the shipyards ranged from 400,000 to 800.000, with the $2 Million price based on 600.000 man-hours. A larger ship does not take proportionately more time to build, as the larger ship allows for more workers to work on it. A 25,000 Gross Register Ton hull might take less than two years to build if a bulk carrier to 3 or so if a warship. Before someone says that the star ships have to be stronger than a nautical ship, consider that a merchant ship has to be able to survive the beating of a gale in the North Atlantic during the winter. The G-loads measured by research and weather hips can be quite impressive. So the cost of the hull should be proportionate to the increase in dimensions and ship volume, not simply jumping by an arbitrary number for every 100 tons of increased hull size.


Any ship built on a planet with an atmosphere from 4 to 9 is automatically streamlined with no extra cost. If atmosphere is less that 4, or the ship is built in orbit, then the increased cost is applied for streamlining. Building a ship on a vacuum planet or it orbit doubles the cost of the hull, as all workers need to be able to operate in a vacuum, and maybe in Zero-G.

 

[wellis]

Might it also depend on the material the ship's hull or armor is made from as well?

Like what kind of materials do ships use for armor in your setting?

 

[robject]

One thing High Guard did to balance the scales (other than armor) was to increase the volume requirement for maneuver drives.

It's a non-complicated change that creates a great difference between merchants, which can afford to be slow, and combat ships, which cannot afford not to be fast.

Basically, then, cargo space trades off for maneuver drive and armor.

 

[Condottiere]

Designs should be a series of compromises.

 

[Timerover51]

Designs should be a series of compromises.

A ship is simply the result of a large number of trade offs.

Same idea, different wording. Warships are even worse when it comes to trade offs/compromises, as typically you have some bureaucrats who really do not know the technology writing the specifications.

One case I can think of was the U.S. Admiral in the 1950s who wanted a small and cheap destroyer with a sustained speed in a seaway of 30 knots. To meet the seaway speed requirement, the initial design came in at over 10,000 tons and was still questionable on making the speed.

 

[Timerover51]

Might it also depend on the material the ship's hull or armor is made from as well?

I am assuming that the standard merchant ship's hull is made from 40 pound/25 millimeter HY-80 steel, similar to what has been used in submarines. Over that is a layer of insulation, with a thin additional layer of highly reflective aluminum alloy. If the ship does not have retractable landing pads, then the insulation layer is inside of the steel hull on the bottom of the ship, along with an additional layer of structural steel to support the hull in landing.

Different materials will make a difference, as will going to a thinner steel hull for smaller ships. The 40 pound/one inch thick hull is definitely an overly conservative design, but it matches what I once calculated for ship hulls based on Supplement 7: Traders and Gunboats and the ANNIC NOVA adventure. I should note that this type of plating is much stronger than the plating used on current nautical merchant ships using mild steel, and in World War 2, HY-80 steel would have been classed as armor plating. You could build the ship hull out of mild steel of equal thickness for say one-half the price, and still have a very strong hull.

Like what kind of materials do ships use for armor in your setting?

First, Titanium. Titanium and steel are two different materials entirely, so it would be more accurate to say Titanium plating. Titanium is lighter than steel and as strong, so that on a weight basis, a Titanium plate is gong to be thicker and as a result, much stiffer than a steel plate of equal weight and be much stronger in resisting impacts due to the greater thickness. It is also highly resistant to corrosion, and would be ideal for ships having to operate in corrosive atmospheres on a regular basis. However, it is also currently between 8 and 30 times more expensive than steel alloy plate. Now, assuming that in the future titanium processing technology improves so that plating is closer in cost to steel, I would assume the cost increase for a hull made of titanium with a weight equivalent of 40 pound steel plate to be 5 times as expensive. This will give you a corrosion-resistant hull, with the hull plating 3 times stiffer than steel of equal weight, resulting in fewer structural members being required, and about twice as hard to penetrate as an equivalent weight of steel. Considering the reduction in structural members required, resulting in fewer man-hours needed, I would say that a hull made of titanium should cost about 4 times that of a steel hull. That cost can be reduced by reducing the thickness of the titanium. As I have said, I am being overly conservative with my hull thicknesses.

Crystal Iron, I will simply say no, for what I regard as good and sufficient reasons that I do not wish to spell out here.

Superdense and Bonded Superdense. As I understand it, this is steel that has been collapsed into a smaller thickness, increasing its density, and therefore strength and resistant to penetration. First, you will need to fabricate the steel plating, correctly shape it, and then collapse the plating. That is going to take some form of sophisticated technology, which I cannot view as being cheap to make or use. You are going to need to correctly shape it before collapsing it, as once collapsed, you are not going to be able to shape it afterward. As I may be allowing collapsium in the sector, I have to make allowance for this. As to cost, I will be figuring Superdense at 20 times the cost of a standard steel hull, and Bonded Superdense at 100 times the cost of a standard steel hull. Essentially, that material will be for warships only.

Hull costs are going to be lowered, as that should compensate for some of the increase in cost of armor.

It should also be noted that steel and titanium plating, while good at stopping gamma and x-ray radiation, is not at all good for stopping neutrons, which was the reason for the neutron bomb. To stop neutrons, you want either very light material, or something with a very high neutron capture radius, like gadolinium or hafnium.

 

[Straybow]

I am working on a ship construction rules rewrite that is going to make military equipment a LOT more expensive. The same is going to happen with armor. Also, some of the weaponry carried is going to change. If you are primarily raiding surface targets, you are going to use a different set of weapons compared to space piracy. When you look at the career of Francis Drake, he spend more time raiding Spanish settlements that chasing Spanish ships. The buccaneers of the Spanish Main also did a lot of settlement raiding.

Need to make most basic construction far cheaper. Ships are typically built for $4k-5k per ton. Cruise ships with fancy decoration cost 24-50% more (a few are more extravagant). Military ships build for more like $25k per ton.


Compare to airliners that cost 100x as much, $500k per ton. Some even more. They are minimizing weight with very expensive materials and fit more stuff in per ton of mass. On a per volume basis it is closer to 50x the cost.


Now look at revenue. A cruise price is about $50 per m² per day. An economy/business airline seat price is about $100 per m² per hour.


Gawwwleee, look at that! Costs and revenue are balanced with air travel costs and prices about 50x cruise travel! Whodathunkit?



Traveller's error is making starship costs compare with airliner costs, and sets passenger and cargo rates that compare with cruise ships rates.

 

[wellis]

First, Titanium. Titanium and steel are two different materials entirely, so it would be more accurate to say Titanium plating. Titanium is lighter than steel and as strong, so that on a weight basis, a Titanium plate is gong to be thicker and as a result, much stiffer than a steel plate of equal weight and be much stronger in resisting impacts due to the greater thickness. It is also highly resistant to corrosion, and would be ideal for ships having to operate in corrosive atmospheres on a regular basis. However, it is also currently between 8 and 30 times more expensive than steel alloy plate. Now, assuming that in the future titanium processing technology improves so that plating is closer in cost to steel, I would assume the cost increase for a hull made of titanium with a weight equivalent of 40 pound steel plate to be 5 times as expensive. This will give you a corrosion-resistant hull, with the hull plating 3 times stiffer than steel of equal weight, resulting in fewer structural members being required, and about twice as hard to penetrate as an equivalent weight of steel. Considering the reduction in structural members required, resulting in fewer man-hours needed, I would say that a hull made of titanium should cost about 4 times that of a steel hull. That cost can be reduced by reducing the thickness of the titanium. As I have said, I am being overly conservative with my hull thicknesses.

So essentially instead of "titanium steel", it would be instead more like "titanium alloy" or something like that?

Crystal Iron, I will simply say no, for what I regard as good and sufficient reasons that I do not wish to spell out here.

I thought "crystaliron" was some sort of term used for monocrystalline steel, which is apparently much stronger due to being composed of a single crystal or something?

Superdense and Bonded Superdense. As I understand it, this is steel that has been collapsed into a smaller thickness, increasing its density, and therefore strength and resistant to penetration. First, you will need to fabricate the steel plating, correctly shape it, and then collapse the plating. That is going to take some form of sophisticated technology, which I cannot view as being cheap to make or use. You are going to need to correctly shape it before collapsing it, as once collapsed, you are not going to be able to shape it afterward. As I may be allowing collapsium in the sector, I have to make allowance for this. As to cost, I will be figuring Superdense at 20 times the cost of a standard steel hull, and Bonded Superdense at 100 times the cost of a standard steel hull. Essentially, that material will be for warships only.

So which one would fit "collapsium" better in your mind? Would one be like called, in-setting, "Collapsium" and the other "Improved Collapsium"?

Hull costs are going to be lowered, as that should compensate for some of the increase in cost of armor.

It should also be noted that steel and titanium plating, while good at stopping gamma and x-ray radiation, is not at all good for stopping neutrons, which was the reason for the neutron bomb. To stop neutrons, you want either very light material, or something with a very high neutron capture radius, like gadolinium or hafnium.

I forget but can water be used to protect against neutrons? I understand it is often thought of as a useful radiation shield in science fiction.

 

[Timerover51]

Need to make most basic construction far cheaper. Ships are typically built for $4k-5k per ton. Cruise ships with fancy decoration cost 24-50% more (a few are more extravagant). Military ships build for more like $25k per ton.

The World War 2 Liberty ship came in at a little under $300 per measurement ton, which is the closest that I can come to the Traveller dTon in terms of volume measurement. Now, the ship was built of mild shipbuilding steel, which actually would be adequate for Traveller ships. I could drop the HY-80 steel and go back to the vanadium steel alloy used by the World War 2 U.S. Navy in its later subs. Hulls made from that had a crush depth of over 900 feet, which was a problem as the rest of the sub equipment was not cleared to much over 450 feet. That steel was seven-eights of an inch thick, or 35 pound plate. Cut that to one-half inch and you still have a big safety factor. The main thing is holding one atmosphere pressure against a vacuum, and then handling 1.5 atmosphere pressure if landing on a Dense Atmosphere planet. I am using the rule-of-thumb equations for designing a submarine hull as my basic building rule.

Compare to airliners that cost 100x as much, $500k per ton. Some even more. They are minimizing weight with very expensive materials and fit more stuff in per ton of mass. On a per volume basis it is closer to 50x the cost.

Now look at revenue. A cruise price is about $50 per m² per day. An economy/business airline seat price is about $100 per m² per hour.

Gawwwleee, look at that! Costs and revenue are balanced with air travel costs and prices about 50x cruise travel! Whodathunkit?

Traveller's error is making starship costs compare with airliner costs, and sets passenger and cargo rates that compare with cruise ships rates.

Well, I am adjusting those a well, as I am having two crew per stateroom, along with up the 4 passengers per stateroom, with the same life-suuport costs as one person. As I see it, the main life support factor is clearing the CO2 absorption filters, dumping the waste tanks, and replacing the food, with the food the greatest cost.

From Cepheus Engine SRD, page 109.

Each stateroom on a ship costs Cr2,000 per month, occupied or not. This cost covers supplies for the life support system as well as food and water, although meals at this level will be rather spartan.

Why this is assumed I have not the foggiest idea. The Traveller Book has restaurant meals of ordinary quality costing 10Cr per day per person, with good food costing 200Cr per month. You are only feeding your passengers for two weeks of the month, so good food should cost 100Cr per month for one passenger, or excellent food would cost 300Cr per month. Forget the spartan meals, the passengers will be well fed.

As for cargo, I figure that the 1000 Credits per dTon is a volume charge, and if you go with speculative trading on a Free Trader, you can put more an a single ton of cargo in that 13,5 or 14 meter cubic volume. I keep looking a cube per ton of various cargos and keep debating allowing for 5 tons or 10 tons per Traveller dTon of cargo. I am still working on that. The thing is how to avoid making a Free Trader a cash cow. Against that, I also am looking at making maintenance a lot more expensive, and then there is this nasty thing called "Insurance".

 

[Timerover51]

So essentially instead of "titanium steel", it would be instead more like "titanium alloy" or something like that?

Titanium alloy would be far more accurate, and it would not be put over steel but in place of steel. It would be quite good for Insidious and Corrosive atmospheres, but a bit more expensive.

I thought "crystaliron" was some sort of term used for monocrystalline steel, which is apparently much stronger due to being composed of a single crystal or something?

As I said, I really do not want to get into that.

So which one would fit "collapsium" better in your mind? Would one be like called, in-setting, "Collapsium" and the other "Improved Collapsium"?

Actually, it would be superdense, bonded superdense, and collapsium. But I am still not sure about the collapsium use. Piper used both collapsium and direct conversion of nuclear energy into electricity for his power units. However, evidently the fusion plants used in vehicles also provide for direct conversion of nuclear energy into electricity. With that being the case, then adding Piper's power units is not that big a jump. I might toss that idea out into the main forum.

I forget but can water be used to protect against neutrons? I understand it is often thought of as a useful radiation shield in science fiction.

Water is an excellent neutron absorber. That is why a lot of reactors are cooled by it and lot of research reactors are simply deep pools of water. Plastic or foam insulation works well too, if the thickness is great enough.

By the way, keep the questions coming, everyone. They really stimulate the brain cells to do useful work, instead of vegetating.

 

[wellis]

Actually, it would be superdense, bonded superdense, and collapsium. But I am still not sure about the collapsium use. Piper used both collapsium and direct conversion of nuclear energy into electricity for his power units. However, evidently the fusion plants used in vehicles also provide for direct conversion of nuclear energy into electricity. With that being the case, then adding Piper's power units is not that big a jump. I might toss that idea out into the main forum.

Hmm so what TL would collapsium appear at? And fluff wise, and maybe crunch wise(?) as well, how might your versions of superdense, bonded superdense, & collapsium differ from the generic CE versions?

Like would superdense be a TL 10 creation in your setting, since crystaliron isn't a thing? While bonded superdense is TL 12 & collapsium is like TL 14?

How might collapsium differ from bonded superdense? Like what is the main improvement mentioned in the fluff?


As for Piper's power units, does that mean spacecraft in your setting would rely generally on fusion, or fission instead, for providing energy?

 

[whulorigan]

Like would superdense be a TL 10 creation in your setting, since crystaliron isn't a thing? While bonded superdense is TL 12 & collapsium is like TL 14?

In some of the T5 draft material (T5 pre-publication), "Dense" was an option at about TL10/11, with Superdense at TL13.

Presumably TL12 "Superdense" would be "Early" Superdense, and TL 14 "Bonded-Superdense" would be "Improved" Superdense, using the TL Stage Effect concept.

 

[kilemall]

It should also be noted that steel and titanium plating, while good at stopping gamma and x-ray radiation, is not at all good for stopping neutrons, which was the reason for the neutron bomb. To stop neutrons, you want either very light material, or something with a very high neutron capture radius, like gadolinium or hafnium.

Or, fuel tanks wrapped around the majority of the ship, between the external hull and the interior.


https://technology.nasa.gov/patent/GSC-TOPS-142


It also acts as ersatz armor, absorbing hits before vital internal systems.


Heh, this article suggests hydrogen-rich plastic. I'd assume we call that some form of composites.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_threat_from_cosmic_rays#Shielding

 

[Timerover51]

Hmm so what TL would collapsium appear at? And fluff wise, and maybe crunch wise(?) as well, how might your versions of superdense, bonded superdense, & collapsium differ from the generic CE versions?

Like would superdense be a TL 10 creation in your setting, since crystaliron isn't a thing? While bonded superdense is TL 12 & collapsium is like TL 14?

How might collapsium differ from bonded superdense? Like what is the main improvement mentioned in the fluff?

The Tech Level for collapsium I will still need to work out. As for Superdense and Bonded Superdense, I am assuming that Superdense is simply a variety of steel collapsed to twice the density of standard steel plating, with Bonded Superdense having an energy field running through it to improve the resistance to impact. Collapsium, on the other hand is pure collapsed matter, matter made purely from neutrons, with the neutrons touching. The stuff neutron stars are made of.

As for Piper's power units, does that mean spacecraft in your setting would rely generally on fusion, or fission instead, for providing energy?

I am going with fusion for powering ships simply because deuterium is a lot more common than uranium or thorium, although thorium is not that uncommon. The reason that I include Thorium is that you can breed fissionable U-233 from Thorium-232. However, I am thinking of a minimum size for fusion plants, and substituting Piper's nuclear-electric power units for small power plants. At this point, the issue is still in flux, and not the dice rolling kind.

 

[Straybow]

Why [Cr2000/stateroom] is assumed I have not the foggiest idea. The Traveller Book has restaurant meals of ordinary quality costing 10Cr per day per person, with good food costing 200Cr per month. You are only feeding your passengers for two weeks of the month, so good food should cost 100Cr per month for one passenger, or excellent food would cost 300Cr per month. Forget the spartan meals, the passengers will be well fed.

I'm a firm believer that the Cr2000/stateroom was a dummy value used in early game development and playtesting. It was to be revised with "real" numbers, and the revision just never happened. Air and water, scrubber supplies, and pest fumigation might total a tenth of that when forced to use the starport's sole licensed service (ya know, the one that gives kickbacks to the starport staff). Otherwise more like Cr100.

As for cargo, I figure that the 1000 Credits per dTon is a volume charge, and if you go with speculative trading on a Free Trader, you can put more an a single ton of cargo in that 13,5 or 14 meter cubic volume. I keep looking a cube per ton of various cargos and keep debating allowing for 5 tons or 10 tons per Traveller dTon of cargo. I am still working on that. The thing is how to avoid making a Free Trader a cash cow. Against that, I also am looking at making maintenance a lot more expensive, and then there is this nasty thing called "Insurance".

I'm a fan of a simple 2 ton/dT rule of thumb, with lesser loading reducing fuel consumption and increasing performance by 10% per ton/dT reduced, and greater loading up to 5 ton/dT reducing performance and increasing fuel consumption by 10% per ton/dT above 2.


5 tons/dT is approximately the old register ton, which remains a very good gauge of roadworthy/seaworthy loading.

 

[Timerover51]

I'm a firm believer that the Cr2000/stateroom was a dummy value used in early game development and playtesting. It was to be revised with "real" numbers, and the revision just never happened. Air and water, scrubber supplies, and pest fumigation might total a tenth of that when forced to use the starport's sole licensed service (ya know, the one that gives kickbacks to the starport staff). Otherwise more like Cr100.

I suspect that you are likely correct with the idea that it was initially a dummy value plugged in, but I can live with it. My main problem was the assumption expressed in other threads on the forum that passengers were going to get basically MRE or frozen pre-packaged meals for that cost. That I have problems with. One other fee that is going to show up is waste disposal fees, as a ship is going to need to dump its waste sludge tanks as well. Cruise ships in the Caribbean get tagged for that on just about every island, and I was factoring it into ship operating costs for an actual ship. Now, the cruise ships are not recycling water to any degree, so they are just pumping the "grey water" tanks into port settling tanks, but there is still a fee. Depending on where you are at air and water might not be that cheap either, such as in an Asteroid Belt or a planet with a non-standard atmosphere. The same could hold true for the sludge tanks, as on an Asteroid, they might be buying it from you, rather than charging you to dispose of it.

Your licensing service will work at Class "A", "B". and "C" star ports, but not at Class "D" or "E", where you are pretty much on your own. Some of that cost is likely to make sure that you have spare stocks on hand and within any expiration dates.

An alternate way of computing it would be simply to charge 1000 to 2000 Credits in life support costs for every person on board, rather than for every stateroom. I keep looking at the size of the Traveller staterooms compared to ones on cruise ships and keep thinking that you could handle up to four people in a Traveller stateroom for a week. Consider a family of four traveling to another system. At middle passage and one passenger per stateroom, that would be a cost of 32,000 Credits, with the same if you put one adult and one child per stateroom. If you allow for 4 per stateroom, and charge life support costs per person, then the first person pays 8000 Credits, the second say 4000 Credits, and the other two pay 2000 credits. The total is 16,000 Credits for the family. Now, I have not crunched those number to see how they would work in the game. However, I am charging quite a bit more for maintenance, and that nasty thing called "insurance".

I'm a fan of a simple 2 ton/dT rule of thumb, with lesser loading reducing fuel consumption and increasing performance by 10% per ton/dT reduced, and greater loading up to 5 ton/dT reducing performance and increasing fuel consumption by 10% per ton/dT above 2.

5 tons/dT is approximately the old register ton, which remains a very good gauge of roadworthy/seaworthy loading.

I keep looking at the enormous amount of empty space a star ship is then hauling around without generating any revenue. Steel weighs about 480 pounds per cubic foot, so 2 metric tons of steel is going to occupy all of 9 to 10 cubic feet of space, roughly a third of a cubic meter. That leaves over 13 cubic meters of space empty. What a friend of mine who is a missionary in Africa was doing when shipping corrugated steel for roofing was putting the steel in the bottom of the shipping container and then filling the rest of the container with used clothing to be given out to refugees, as the steel really hit the weight loading of a container quickly, and paid the freight for the clothing. Other cargo is going to be a lot lighter, say dust filters for large trucks or air conditioning units on arid planets. With those, you might have only 40 pounds per cubic meter, so a Traveller dTon would max out its volume with 250 or so kilograms. Vehicles would be all over the map with respect to weight verse volume, and would have to be charged separately.

The 5 mass tons per dTon does pretty much reflect the nautical gross register ton, and does make things a lot simpler when it comes to shipping. That does almost exactly match the mass-volume ratio of mixed food items, which makes figuring the volume needed for long-duration missions a lot easier as well. What I need to do is sit down and take all of my shipping data for various cargos and see what makes the most sense, and then put it into a table for use by the Traveller forum.

 

[kilemall]

One thing High Guard did to balance the scales (other than armor) was to increase the volume requirement for maneuver drives.

It's a non-complicated change that creates a great difference between merchants, which can afford to be slow, and combat ships, which cannot afford not to be fast.

Basically, then, cargo space trades off for maneuver drive and armor.

Another big differentiator is computer. Those J-1 and J-2 ships require a lot cheaper computers then the Big Fast Stuff.

 

[Grav_Moped]

One thing High Guard did to balance the scales (other than armor) was to increase the volume requirement for maneuver drives.

It's a non-complicated change that creates a great difference between merchants, which can afford to be slow, and combat ships, which cannot afford not to be fast.

Basically, then, cargo space trades off for maneuver drive and armor.

Another issue is the 2nd Edition requirement for a power plant for the Jump Drive. In LBB2 ('77), the full power plant costs (in drive and fuel Td, and MCr) were solely allocated to the maneuver drive. In LBB2 ('81), you already had a power plant equal to your Jump Drive so the marginal cost for maneuver Gs was small until G>Jn. (This is probably why the canon Far Trader was J2, 1G and not J2, 2G -- it was designed under 1977 rules. The Subsidized Liner is a more extreme case of this).
Numbers under the spoiler:

Spoiler:

200Td Far Trader (Jump 2):
Under '77 rules, upgrading from 1G to 2G costs MCr12 and 14Td (MD-A to MD-B, PP-A to PP-B, add 10Td fuel).
Under '81 rules, upgrading from 1G to 2G costs MCr4 and 2Td (MD-A to MD-B, no change in fuel requirement).
600Td Subsidized Liner (Jump 3):
Under '77 rules, upgrading from 1G to 3G costs MCr60 and 40Td (MD-C to MD-J, PP-C to PP-J, add 20Td fuel)
Under '81 rules, upgrading from 1G to 3G costs MCr24 and 12Td (MD-C to MD-J, no change in fuel requirement).

Then you get to HG requiring huge power plants for energy weapons. Simply extrapolating the LBB2 tables would mean there would be no reason for any decently-armed ship to not max out the M-Drive since those maneuver drives were small and cheap.

 

[Straybow]

I suspect that you are likely correct with the idea that it was initially a dummy value plugged in, but I can live with it. My main problem was the assumption expressed in other threads on the forum that passengers were going to get basically MRE or frozen pre-packaged meals for that cost. That I have problems with. One other fee that is going to show up is waste disposal fees, as a ship is going to need to dump its waste sludge tanks as well. Cruise ships in the Caribbean get tagged for that on just about every island, and I was factoring it into ship operating costs for an actual ship. Now, the cruise ships are not recycling water to any degree, so they are just pumping the "grey water" tanks into port settling tanks, but there is still a fee. Depending on where you are at air and water might not be that cheap either, such as in an Asteroid Belt or a planet with a non-standard atmosphere. The same could hold true for the sludge tanks, as on an Asteroid, they might be buying it from you, rather than charging you to dispose of it.

Your licensing service will work at Class "A", "B". and "C" star ports, but not at Class "D" or "E", where you are pretty much on your own. Some of that cost is likely to make sure that you have spare stocks on hand and within any expiration dates.

Waste disposal is handled by injection into the fusion power exhaust = instant plasma. No pollution. But I like the idea of capturing waste in a black water tank for sale to sealed environment ports of call who can make use of the organics.



No colony can exist without dependable local air, water, and food. The former two are mined from asteroids and comets, if nothing else is around. It might get expensive on some weird, tiny colony, handled as a special case as part of game play. Any colony may make use of imported products for quality, variety, and luxury.