Maybe I'm not following what you're saying, but my recollection of the
'Sup? 9 jump ship is that it is rated Jump 6 by itself to allow it to
perform, say, Jump 3 carrying something its same size, Jump 1 with
something five times its size, etc. If a jump tug had only Jump 1 for its
base hull it would have no excess jump performance to carry anything.
The "jump grid" bag in Supp 9 would not have been necessary in TNE, as we
dispensed with the notion that the jump "grid" was an external physical
envelope. We would have just talked about how the slung cargo would have
to be tucked in in sufficiently close to the carrier's structure to fit
within the jump field.
But TNE had Virus in it, so you can't really trust it.
> NASA is planning a trip to capture an asteroid. The video is just over 4
> 1/2 minutes.
>
> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=161659311
>
> I particularly like the capture technology used in the video and figured
> that it probably has some usage in Traveller. CT had those Jump Ships
> in Sup9 (but never again IIRC). I figure that if the "bag" material in
> the video was adapted to Traveller and was composed of lanthanum it
> would be more practical than the "special field cables" used in the
> original write-up.
>
> Instead of relying on 5,000 ton ships (that was the displacement of the
> Jump Ship), you could have autonomous 100 ton ships out in the Kuiper
> belt puttering around looking for promising rocks. When a suitable
> target is found, they could jump back to the mainworld or wherever the
> base of operations was. Your jump drive could then be scaled down from
> the Jump Ship's J-6 to J-1. The smaller ships could either carry enough
> fuel for two J-1's (there and back) or fitted with the right equipment
> to make use of a comet (though moving from that comet to a target rock
> might consume too much fuel to make it worth it).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>
'Sup? 9 jump ship is that it is rated Jump 6 by itself to allow it to
perform, say, Jump 3 carrying something its same size, Jump 1 with
something five times its size, etc. If a jump tug had only Jump 1 for its
base hull it would have no excess jump performance to carry anything.
The "jump grid" bag in Supp 9 would not have been necessary in TNE, as we
dispensed with the notion that the jump "grid" was an external physical
envelope. We would have just talked about how the slung cargo would have
to be tucked in in sufficiently close to the carrier's structure to fit
within the jump field.
But TNE had Virus in it, so you can't really trust it.
> NASA is planning a trip to capture an asteroid. The video is just over 4
> 1/2 minutes.
>
> http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=161659311
>
> I particularly like the capture technology used in the video and figured
> that it probably has some usage in Traveller. CT had those Jump Ships
> in Sup9 (but never again IIRC). I figure that if the "bag" material in
> the video was adapted to Traveller and was composed of lanthanum it
> would be more practical than the "special field cables" used in the
> original write-up.
>
> Instead of relying on 5,000 ton ships (that was the displacement of the
> Jump Ship), you could have autonomous 100 ton ships out in the Kuiper
> belt puttering around looking for promising rocks. When a suitable
> target is found, they could jump back to the mainworld or wherever the
> base of operations was. Your jump drive could then be scaled down from
> the Jump Ship's J-6 to J-1. The smaller ships could either carry enough
> fuel for two J-1's (there and back) or fitted with the right equipment
> to make use of a comet (though moving from that comet to a target rock
> might consume too much fuel to make it worth it).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> \_/
> DED
>
>