I just worked it out for the worst world - I remember that little
regengade spaceplane had a configurable fuel tank to deal with
different world sizes.
My PCs established a small polity over in the madoc subsector. With
recovered relic ships, they managed to re-open trade but as more and
more ships were recovered / rebuilt (especially scout vessels and
Bastien liners) there was a desparate need to get people and cargo to
and from orbit. Mass drivers are fine for bulk good like iron etc, but
useless for passengers and delicate cargo.
High tech relic small craft had excellent turn around times, and any
locally produced vessel would have to have something similar. That
leaves out conventional rockets - but there are real designs for the
HOTEL type aircraft, + a mention of this approach in hard times and hey
presto - 2 shuttle craft that could be turned round on a daily basis
(assuming about 6hrs flight + orbit time and the rest of the day for
maint checks)
On 08/03/2015 21:00, [Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>
> Richard--
>
> I am also impressed by the attention you paid to the fact that values
> would vary from world to world, the issue that always took the other 90%
> of design time.
>
> > A bigger version of the settler designed to get 100dtn units into orbit
> > - my polity tended to build saucer shaped ships -cheap and atmo capable,
> > only a few yards had orbital facilities
> >
> > Developed by the Shield Polity in 1204 to provide heavy 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 100 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 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 shuttle’s fusion rocket could be safely
> ignited to
> > boost the shuttle out of the upper reaches of the atmosphere and into
> > orbit. The design’s 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.
> >
> > Small staterooms are provided for all 4 crew.
> >
> > 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 rocket requires 16.8 minutes burn (0.14G) for
> > orbital insertion and de-orbit burn, the remainder can be used for
> > orbital manoeuvring. The following burn times are for a type A planet,
> > smaller worlds will provide a greater fuel reserve.
> >
> >
> > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
> >
> > Poni-B Class Heavy Shuttle
> > Displacement 200 tns; Hull Armour: 10
> > Length: 17m Volume: 2800m
> > Price: MCr 95.87407 Target Size: Small
> > Configuration: SL Sphere,
> > TL: 8 Mass (L/E): 2934.19 / 1422.19
> >
> > Engineering Data:
> > Power Plant: 45MW Fission , Duration 1 year, batteries 22.4MWhrs
> > Jump Performance: 0
> > Manoeuvre Gs: 0.5G on turbofans producing 1000tns thrust, 0.5G on fusion
> > thermal rocket producing 1000tns thrust, contra-gavity
> >
> > G Hours: 1.4 for turbofans, 0.14 for fusion rocket + 2.1 minutes orbital
> > manoeuvring
> > Maint: 182
> >
> > 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, 2 manoeuvring, 1 elec)
> > Workstations: 3 bridge, 1 normal, TL9 controls
> > Crew Accommodations: 4 small staterooms,
> > Cargo: 1512 cubic metres
> > Small craft: None
> > Airlocks 2
> >
> > Other: 4 large cargo hatches
> >
> > Notes: No fuel scoops or plant. Fuel: 4.5kl radioactive, 176.4kl liquid
> > hydrogen, 336kl hydrocarbon distillates.
> >
> > In sub-orbital flight the shuttle has a power surplus of 0.256MW 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 thermal
> > rocket operating, and the contra grav switched off, the FTR is powered
> > down to a 40MW 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
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* "rjperks [Traveller_TNE]"
> >> <>
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> I managed to knock up a 100tn quick turn around shuttle that got
> >> 50dtns into orbit at TL8/9 using the FF&S rules.
> >>
> >> 25MW fission plant + batteries, contra-grav to neutralise weight and
> >> then turbofans for flight into the upper atmo and then the thermal
> >> fusion rocket for the last burn into low orbit. Reverse to get down.
> >> The contra-grav meant that the drives only had to provide thrust for
> >> movement rather than keeping the craft in the air. Even had a spare
> >> 1.8 minutes of fusion burn for orbital operations. Snap at only MCr 54
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> richard
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
regengade spaceplane had a configurable fuel tank to deal with
different world sizes.
My PCs established a small polity over in the madoc subsector. With
recovered relic ships, they managed to re-open trade but as more and
more ships were recovered / rebuilt (especially scout vessels and
Bastien liners) there was a desparate need to get people and cargo to
and from orbit. Mass drivers are fine for bulk good like iron etc, but
useless for passengers and delicate cargo.
High tech relic small craft had excellent turn around times, and any
locally produced vessel would have to have something similar. That
leaves out conventional rockets - but there are real designs for the
HOTEL type aircraft, + a mention of this approach in hard times and hey
presto - 2 shuttle craft that could be turned round on a daily basis
(assuming about 6hrs flight + orbit time and the rest of the day for
maint checks)
On 08/03/2015 21:00, [Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>
> Richard--
>
> I am also impressed by the attention you paid to the fact that values
> would vary from world to world, the issue that always took the other 90%
> of design time.
>
> > A bigger version of the settler designed to get 100dtn units into orbit
> > - my polity tended to build saucer shaped ships -cheap and atmo capable,
> > only a few yards had orbital facilities
> >
> > Developed by the Shield Polity in 1204 to provide heavy 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 100 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 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 shuttle’s fusion rocket could be safely
> ignited to
> > boost the shuttle out of the upper reaches of the atmosphere and into
> > orbit. The design’s 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.
> >
> > Small staterooms are provided for all 4 crew.
> >
> > 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 rocket requires 16.8 minutes burn (0.14G) for
> > orbital insertion and de-orbit burn, the remainder can be used for
> > orbital manoeuvring. The following burn times are for a type A planet,
> > smaller worlds will provide a greater fuel reserve.
> >
> >
> > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
> >
> > Poni-B Class Heavy Shuttle
> > Displacement 200 tns; Hull Armour: 10
> > Length: 17m Volume: 2800m
> > Price: MCr 95.87407 Target Size: Small
> > Configuration: SL Sphere,
> > TL: 8 Mass (L/E): 2934.19 / 1422.19
> >
> > Engineering Data:
> > Power Plant: 45MW Fission , Duration 1 year, batteries 22.4MWhrs
> > Jump Performance: 0
> > Manoeuvre Gs: 0.5G on turbofans producing 1000tns thrust, 0.5G on fusion
> > thermal rocket producing 1000tns thrust, contra-gavity
> >
> > G Hours: 1.4 for turbofans, 0.14 for fusion rocket + 2.1 minutes orbital
> > manoeuvring
> > Maint: 182
> >
> > 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, 2 manoeuvring, 1 elec)
> > Workstations: 3 bridge, 1 normal, TL9 controls
> > Crew Accommodations: 4 small staterooms,
> > Cargo: 1512 cubic metres
> > Small craft: None
> > Airlocks 2
> >
> > Other: 4 large cargo hatches
> >
> > Notes: No fuel scoops or plant. Fuel: 4.5kl radioactive, 176.4kl liquid
> > hydrogen, 336kl hydrocarbon distillates.
> >
> > In sub-orbital flight the shuttle has a power surplus of 0.256MW 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 thermal
> > rocket operating, and the contra grav switched off, the FTR is powered
> > down to a 40MW 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
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* "rjperks [Traveller_TNE]"
> >> <>
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> I managed to knock up a 100tn quick turn around shuttle that got
> >> 50dtns into orbit at TL8/9 using the FF&S rules.
> >>
> >> 25MW fission plant + batteries, contra-grav to neutralise weight and
> >> then turbofans for flight into the upper atmo and then the thermal
> >> fusion rocket for the last burn into low orbit. Reverse to get down.
> >> The contra-grav meant that the drives only had to provide thrust for
> >> movement rather than keeping the craft in the air. Even had a spare
> >> 1.8 minutes of fusion burn for orbital operations. Snap at only MCr 54
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> richard
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>