Richard--
With the expanded stats I love it even more. It makes me think that it
would have been great to be able to spend more time in that "climbing back
up" interstice. I'm picturing a book, "Field Guide to Reconstruction-Era
Spacecraft" showing all of the ingenious solutions produced by various
worlds, PEs, etc.
Where was the Shield Polity located?
> Okay, stats for the settle class shuttle
>
> Settler-A Class Shuttle
>
> Developed by the Shield Polity in mid-1204 to provide general orbital
> transfer capability using the basic TL8 and emerging TL9 technologies at
> the new starports opening within the polity. Its purpose was to provide
> a small shuttle capable of lifting 50 displacement tonnes into orbit,
> and manoeuvring to a space station, whilst allowing a rapid turn around
> on par with the relic Heplar powered shuttles. The shuttle was designed
> to operate from the smaller ports within the Polity and be built by the
> newly opened smaller shipyards.
>
> The rapid turn around provision prevented the use of solid fuel
> boosters. Conventional turbofans are used to provide motive power to
> raise the shuttle to its orbital insertion point (90%) whilst the new
> contra-grav system neutralised the crafts weight. At the high orbital
> insertion point, the shuttleâs fusion thermal rocket could be safely
> ignited to boost the shuttle out of the upper reaches of the atmosphere
> and into orbit. The designâs flexibility allowed a significant fuel
> allowance to be carried to allow considerable orbital manoeuvring, and
> even transit to nearby moons and planets. A small allowance has been
> provided in the fuel supply for the turbofans to allow atmospheric
> manoeuvring.
>
> The fuel supply allows both powered ascent and descent. The turbofans
> burn for 151.2 minutes for ascent and descent leaving 16.8 minutes spare
> capacity. The fusion thermal rocket requires 16.8 minutes burn (0.14G)
> for orbital insertion and de-orbit burn, the remainder can be used for
> orbital manoeuvring (1.8 minutes). The following burn times are for a
> type A planet, smaller worlds will provide a greater fuel reserve.
>
>
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
>
> Settler Class Shuttle
> Displacement 100 tns; Hull Armour: 10
> Length: 14m Volume: 1400m
> Price: MCr 54.32814 Target Size: Small
> Configuration: SL Sphere,
> TL: 8 Mass (L/E): 1465.218 / 765.218
>
> Engineering Data:
> Power Plant: 25MW Fission , Duration 1 year, Batteries 11.2MWHRs
> Jump Performance: 0
> Manoeuvre Gs: 0.5G on turbofans producing 500tns thrust, 0.5G on fusion
> thermal rocket producing 500tns thrust,
> contra-gavity
>
> G Hours: 1.4 for turbofans, 0.14 for fusion rocket + 1.8 minutes orbital
> manoeuvre
> Maint: 90
>
> Electronics:
> Computer: 2 x TL9 std
> Commo: Radio 30,000km; Maser com, 3,000km
> Avionics: TL8 avionics and navigation aids
> Sensors: Radar, 300km;
> Armament: None
> Accommodation: Extended life support
> Crew 4 (1 engineering/maint, 2 manoeuvring, 1 elec)
> Workstations: 3 bridge, 1 normal, TL9 controls
> Crew Accommodations: 1 small stateroom, 3 bunks
> Cargo: 700 cubic metres
> Small craft: None
> Airlocks 1
>
> Other: 2 large cargo hatches
>
> Notes: No fuel scoops or plant. Fuel: 2.5kl radioactive, 86.8kl liquid
> hydrogen, 168kl hydrocarbon distillates.
>
> In sub-orbital flight the shuttle has a power surplus of 0.5385MW with
> the combined power output of the power plant and the turbo fans. During
> orbital transfer, the shuttle uses its batteries to make up the power
> shortfall to power the fusion thermal rocket and the additional
> contra-grav requirement. In orbital flight with the fusion rocket
> operating, and the contra grav switched off, the FTR is powered down to
> a 20MW level (0.3G).
>
>
>
>
> On 08/03/2015 17:20, Todd Kes [Traveller_TNE]
> wrote:
>> That's actually pretty darn interesting. I wonder if we could do a
>> semi-timeline of orbital launch capacity. I.e. show the most
>> efficient TL 7 launch platform (efficient = least $/ton into orbit),
>> then TL 8, then TL 9, aso. (I.e. TL 8 means nothing over TL 8, so the
>> below launch platform would count as TL 9).
>>
>> It would be interesting (to me) to see the cost per ton drop as the TL
>> goes up.
>>
>> For example your launch vessel below would be:
>> TL 9: MCr 54 @ 50 dtons = 1.08 MCr/dton (reusable)
>>
>> Adding in the resuable costs and turn-around time would be nice.
>>
>> Todd Kes
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
With the expanded stats I love it even more. It makes me think that it
would have been great to be able to spend more time in that "climbing back
up" interstice. I'm picturing a book, "Field Guide to Reconstruction-Era
Spacecraft" showing all of the ingenious solutions produced by various
worlds, PEs, etc.
Where was the Shield Polity located?
> Okay, stats for the settle class shuttle
>
> Settler-A Class Shuttle
>
> Developed by the Shield Polity in mid-1204 to provide general orbital
> transfer capability using the basic TL8 and emerging TL9 technologies at
> the new starports opening within the polity. Its purpose was to provide
> a small shuttle capable of lifting 50 displacement tonnes into orbit,
> and manoeuvring to a space station, whilst allowing a rapid turn around
> on par with the relic Heplar powered shuttles. The shuttle was designed
> to operate from the smaller ports within the Polity and be built by the
> newly opened smaller shipyards.
>
> The rapid turn around provision prevented the use of solid fuel
> boosters. Conventional turbofans are used to provide motive power to
> raise the shuttle to its orbital insertion point (90%) whilst the new
> contra-grav system neutralised the crafts weight. At the high orbital
> insertion point, the shuttleâs fusion thermal rocket could be safely
> ignited to boost the shuttle out of the upper reaches of the atmosphere
> and into orbit. The designâs flexibility allowed a significant fuel
> allowance to be carried to allow considerable orbital manoeuvring, and
> even transit to nearby moons and planets. A small allowance has been
> provided in the fuel supply for the turbofans to allow atmospheric
> manoeuvring.
>
> The fuel supply allows both powered ascent and descent. The turbofans
> burn for 151.2 minutes for ascent and descent leaving 16.8 minutes spare
> capacity. The fusion thermal rocket requires 16.8 minutes burn (0.14G)
> for orbital insertion and de-orbit burn, the remainder can be used for
> orbital manoeuvring (1.8 minutes). The following burn times are for a
> type A planet, smaller worlds will provide a greater fuel reserve.
>
>
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
>
> Settler Class Shuttle
> Displacement 100 tns; Hull Armour: 10
> Length: 14m Volume: 1400m
> Price: MCr 54.32814 Target Size: Small
> Configuration: SL Sphere,
> TL: 8 Mass (L/E): 1465.218 / 765.218
>
> Engineering Data:
> Power Plant: 25MW Fission , Duration 1 year, Batteries 11.2MWHRs
> Jump Performance: 0
> Manoeuvre Gs: 0.5G on turbofans producing 500tns thrust, 0.5G on fusion
> thermal rocket producing 500tns thrust,
> contra-gavity
>
> G Hours: 1.4 for turbofans, 0.14 for fusion rocket + 1.8 minutes orbital
> manoeuvre
> Maint: 90
>
> Electronics:
> Computer: 2 x TL9 std
> Commo: Radio 30,000km; Maser com, 3,000km
> Avionics: TL8 avionics and navigation aids
> Sensors: Radar, 300km;
> Armament: None
> Accommodation: Extended life support
> Crew 4 (1 engineering/maint, 2 manoeuvring, 1 elec)
> Workstations: 3 bridge, 1 normal, TL9 controls
> Crew Accommodations: 1 small stateroom, 3 bunks
> Cargo: 700 cubic metres
> Small craft: None
> Airlocks 1
>
> Other: 2 large cargo hatches
>
> Notes: No fuel scoops or plant. Fuel: 2.5kl radioactive, 86.8kl liquid
> hydrogen, 168kl hydrocarbon distillates.
>
> In sub-orbital flight the shuttle has a power surplus of 0.5385MW with
> the combined power output of the power plant and the turbo fans. During
> orbital transfer, the shuttle uses its batteries to make up the power
> shortfall to power the fusion thermal rocket and the additional
> contra-grav requirement. In orbital flight with the fusion rocket
> operating, and the contra grav switched off, the FTR is powered down to
> a 20MW level (0.3G).
>
>
>
>
> On 08/03/2015 17:20, Todd Kes [Traveller_TNE]
> wrote:
>> That's actually pretty darn interesting. I wonder if we could do a
>> semi-timeline of orbital launch capacity. I.e. show the most
>> efficient TL 7 launch platform (efficient = least $/ton into orbit),
>> then TL 8, then TL 9, aso. (I.e. TL 8 means nothing over TL 8, so the
>> below launch platform would count as TL 9).
>>
>> It would be interesting (to me) to see the cost per ton drop as the TL
>> goes up.
>>
>> For example your launch vessel below would be:
>> TL 9: MCr 54 @ 50 dtons = 1.08 MCr/dton (reusable)
>>
>> Adding in the resuable costs and turn-around time would be nice.
>>
>> Todd Kes
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>