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 shuttle’s fusion thermal 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.
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
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
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
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
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
>
>
®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.
Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
enterprises for hosting services:
CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net)
The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 19:17:44 +0000, rjperks
wrote:
>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
Ditto permission for this one?
--
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller
The Electronic Fan-Supported
Traveller® Fanzine and Resource
®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.
Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
enterprises for hosting services:
CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net)
The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)
Of course, its not the full stats as it is missing all the hit location
stuff. I will send the word docs across.
Cheers
richard
On 08/03/2015 19:51, Freelance Traveller
[Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 19:14:42 +0000, rjperks
> wrote:
>
> >Okay, stats for the settle class shuttle
> >
> >Settler-A Class Shuttle
>
> 1. Permission to borg this for Freelance Traveller's "Shipyard"?
>
> 2. By "Type A planet", I assume you actually mean UWP Size code A?
>
> --
> Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
> Freelance Traveller
> The Electronic Fan-Supported
> Traveller� Fanzine and Resource
>
>
> http://www.freelancetraveller.com
> http://freelancetraveller.downport.com/
>
> �Traveller is a registered trademark of
> Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of
> the trademark in this notice and in the
> referenced materials is not intended to
> infringe or devalue the trademark.
>
> Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
> enterprises for hosting services:
>
> CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net)
> The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)
>
>
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
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
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 shuttleâs fusion 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.
>
> 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
>>
>>
>
>
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
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
did you get the files for the ships / vehicles / dome bases
cheers
richard
On 08/03/2015 19:54, Freelance Traveller
[Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 19:17:44 +0000, rjperks
> wrote:
>
> >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
>
> Ditto permission for this one?
>
> --
> Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
> Freelance Traveller
> The Electronic Fan-Supported
> Traveller� Fanzine and Resource
>
>
> http://www.freelancetraveller.com
> http://freelancetraveller.downport.com/
>
> �Traveller is a registered trademark of
> Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of
> the trademark in this notice and in the
> referenced materials is not intended to
> infringe or devalue the trademark.
>
> Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
> enterprises for hosting services:
>
> CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net)
> The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)
>
>
®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.
Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
enterprises for hosting services:
CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net)
The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)