From owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM  Thu Dec 26 06:13:58 1996
Return-Path: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Received: from phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (Phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.5]) by emin18.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id GAA22314; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 06:13:55 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA06166; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 06:10:36 -0500
Received: by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 26 Dec 1996 06:09:26 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) id GAA05911 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 06:09:24 -0500
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 06:09:24 -0500
Message-Id: <199612261109.GAA05911@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller-digest V1996 #790
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com


Traveller-digest     Thursday, December 26 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 790



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

More thoughts on Starports
(Off-topic humor) MILITARY EVALUATIONS
Re: Routine Maintenance (long)
NAVAL ACADEMY and MARINES
Traveller PBM
Re: NAVAL ACADEMY and MARINES
Re: Tech and Starports
Re: Oh dear...(was "Economics...")
Re: Routine Maintenance

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 23:51:46 +1100
From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
Subject: More thoughts on Starports

Some of the comments against my proposition that the presence of an A or B
Starport on a world effectively negates the worlds TL and replaces it with
Average Imperial (TL12 for Milieu 0, for example) set me to thinking -

One line of thought is that the presence of a Starport has no effect on the
locals because they see no reason to be affected by it and/or cannot afford
to purchase the high tech goods it represents.

The arguments adduced to this scenario seem to have missed the point ...
or, more than likely, in my old age i'm not making myself as clear as I
*should* be.

The minimum TL world on which you will find an A or B Starport is one of
TL5 ... that is, a world with Tech circa 1900-1940 in Terran terms. This
indicates a world with a good industrial base to support a machine based
technology - and, unless some weird (and probably unique) local factor
means otherwise, a good science level as well.

All of the examples against my proposition have been of the third world
African or isolated (relatively speaking) Pacific island variety. These
societies, if cut off from the rest of the world, would be thrown back onto
their underlaying TL ... perhaps TL3-4 in the case of the African examples
(they lack the infrastructure to build themselves better), and probably
only 0-1 in the case of the isolated Pacific islands (they lack indigenous
sources of raw materials vital to a higher tech - such as iron, apart from
scrap imported from elsewhere, which would eventually run out). They are
not, therefore, good examples of what the situation (might) really be like
in our hypothetical situation.

The societies in question are mechanised and industrialies - otherwise they
wouldn't qualify as TL5+ (sorry, to qualify at this level you *have* to be
mechanised and industrialised - that's what defines the TL in historical
terms). Therefore, they see the value of technical advancements - perhaps
not as well as they might, but that's entirely dur to hindsight anyway.
They also see the benefits of taking advantage of the presence of a high
tech facility such as a Starport.

Why is the Starport there? Well, since, as we are told (and, yes, I *know*
i'm harping on this, but it is *vitally* relevant), economics determines
everything, we can assume that its because there's trade *with* the world,
or running *through* the world (as part of an X-boat link - which i've
always assumed means a major trade route is present as well) ... no, it has
little (nothing, I would suggest) to do with military necessity - that's
what a *Naval* or *Scout* Base is representing. So, it's there for economic
reasons. It's got to pay its way - and one way to do this is to provide
services ... damnit, its the *only* way to do it! These services are to the
passing trade - the interstellar cargo and passenger liners that use the
world as a waystation or as an endpoint. If the Starport is an A or B
facility, this means the ability to maintain ships of *any* TL (except, as
the only example against this suggests, if that TL is *above maximum
Imperial*) - and, since this is repeated in *all* iterations of Traveller,
and there has *never* been any caveat about having to be a Starport of a TL
equal to or higher than that of the ship desiring maintenance *and* there
has *never* been any mention about it costing more, then we *must* assume
that this is literally true (unless you want to redesign the game - in
which case, feel free to take it up with Marc if you want it to be more
than unofficial and non-canon).

So. We have this high tech (using T4, say TL12) facility sitting in the
middle of a (say) TL5 world. The locals recognise the value of the tech -
its part of their inherent tech culture itself - and so will attempt to
acquire it. What is stopping them? There are no Imperial Laws against it -
the Imperium is set up to *facilitate* trade, not to restrict it! The cost
of interstellar Transport is no more than 1000 Cr a ton (which we all know
is likely to be a complete crock - but it *is* "canon"). And best of all,
there's all these ships passing through there!!!

This *will* mean that there will be a real reason for ships to carry
cargoes to and from the world to *encourage* the use of high tech items by
the locals in return for the raw materials (or services) that makes it
worthwhile putting the starport there in the first place! It *may* mean
that the relatively low local individual salaries (compared to the
costs/salaries of a high tech world) will *limit* the spread of high tech
stuff, but it will be there - and, inevitably, because of the nature of the
society that produces a sustainable TL of 5+, it will spread and spread
rapidly! OK, maybe they won't have a 100 brands of TL12 Computers - maybe
they'll have only one; maybe they'll only have TL11 Computers - but they
*will* have computers, and these *will* replace TL5 mechanical adding
machines! Forex, a TL12 produced pocket calculator, produced down to a
price for the specific trade with a TL5 (or general low tech, but
industrialised) world will be cheaper than said mechanical calculator *and*
be much more functional than a mechanical calculator could ever be.

The upshot is, that within a *very* short period the world in question will
be at what is effectively TL11 or 12, just short of "cutting edge" - buying
the castoffs of the high tech worlds, perhaps, but much better than they
themselves can produce locally!

Then consider the high tech starport facility. Its already there because it
can turn a profit serving the users - why would they reject turning a
*greater* profit serving the locals. Even if it is somewhat limited to the
city where the starport is or close by (though radio commo links and
satellites - and this would behoove the Starport authorities to have their
own commo satellite links there for their own use - mean that distance is
overrated for these purposes), the facility will have a real incentive to
make available certain services that the locals *will* (given the nature of
their machine using, automated, industrialised culture) recognise the value
of - and that means using the clean Fusion power of the Starport rather
than the clunky local coal or fossil fuel burning plants (and the power is
almost certainly cheaper, too - its like Oz buying all those US TV shows
... the US sees Oz as "icing on the cake" and doesn't charge anywhere
*near* what they charge the US Networks and local stations, as their profit
has already been guaranteed from their main market - just as the
*Starports* main profit has been guaranteed from its main market, otherwise
the damn thing wouldn't be there in the first place!), they see the value
of time-sharing arrangements using the Computing Power available to the
Starport as well, and of using the technical know-how of the Techs employed
there. It also makes some sense for the Starport authority to train local
people as Techs rather than pay a "hardship" allowance for high tech
worlders to come out to the boonies - and most of these locals will retire
locally, and will spread their skills.

Sure, it'll be very spotty - you'll get contradictions like Wrist-Com
equipped local types riding around in the equivalent of a Model-T Ford ...
and others who use a cheap Yugo-equivalent Grav vehicle for transport, but
read print newspapers and communicate by wired telegraphy. But the point is
that the TL5 rating of the local world will be of academic interest at most
- - certainly the PCs will be able to get almost anything they want of a high
tech nature, especially non-specialised items, and given the caveat of
*slightly* higher prices (no more than10-20% I would expect) *and* lack of
"brand name" choice. But, erm, where do brand names come into equipment
choice in Traveller anyway? Isn't all the equipment effectively generic?

Lets take a more realistic Terran example. The US, for example. TL9 at the
very least, probably TL10 in some areas - huge manufacturing and industrial
base at the cutting edge. Highly educated and (averages here) wealthy
population.

Take Oz. Effectively TL9 at the very least, and at least as likely to be
TL10 in some areas (tho different ones) as the US. Small manufacturing and
industrial base - and not at anywhere near the cutting edge in most areas
(and where it is, using mostly imported components from the US or countries
of the same standard). Highly educated and reasonably wealthy populace.

What are the *sustainable* tech levels of each country? Well, its obvious
that the US will have no problem maintaining its TL9/10 level regardless of
anything short of a major nuclear war. Oz? If she was somehow transported
to another (uninhabited) dimension tomorrow? I suspect that the best we
would be able to do would be to maintain a level of around late TL6 to
early to mid TL7. So, how do you classify Oz? As a TL9/10 "planet" or as a
TL6/7 one? Aren't the differences irrelevant? *That's* what I'm getting at.

And note that its around a months shipping time for most bulky items
between US and Oz (assuming its sent by ship - Aircraft are the equivalent
of X-boats for ourt purposes). Or the equivalent of two Jumps. Makes you
think, eh?

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@.curie.dialix.oz.au
Have Game Designer, Will Travel

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 19:43:25 -0500
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: (Off-topic humor) MILITARY EVALUATIONS

I recieved this at work and had have no idea where it came from, but
I though some of you may not have heard this before and would enjoy
it.
______________________________________________________________________
________
The British Military writes OFRs (officer fitness reports).  The form
used for 
Royal Navy and Marines fitness reports is the S206.
The following are actual excerpts taken from people's S206s . . .

- - His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of curiosity.

- - Works well when under constant supervision and cornered like a rat
in a trap.

- - This man is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

- - I would not breed from this Officer.

- - When she opens her mouth, it seems that this is only to change
whichever foot 
was previously in there.

- - He has carried out each and every one of his duties to his entire 
satisfaction.

- - He would be out of his depth in a car park puddle.

- - Technically sound, but socially impossible.

- - This Officer reminds me very much of a gyroscope - always spinning
around at 
a frantic pace, but not really going anywhere.

- - This young lady has delusions of adequacy.

- - This Medical Officer has used my ship to carry his genitals from
port to 
port, and my officers to carry him from bar to bar.

- - Since my last report he has reached rock bottom, and has started to
dig.

- - She sets low personal standards and then consistently fails to
achieve them.

- - He has the wisdom of youth, and the energy of old age.

- - This Officer should go far - and the sooner he starts, the better.

- - In my opinion this pilot should not be authorized to fly below 250
feet.

- - The only ship I would recommend this man for is citizenship.
______________________________________________________________________
___________

Happy Hollydaze

Chris Cox
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)
The Draconis Cluster Traveller pages
(http://users.aol.com/yanbeck/trav.htm)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 18:18:21 -0900
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Routine Maintenance (long)

> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 15:19:52 +1100
> From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
> Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #788
> 
> > From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
> > Subject: Re: Routine Maintenance
> >
> > > From: "Stuart L. Dollar" <sdollar@goodnet.com>
> > >
> > > On 20 Dec 96 at 19:02, Phillip McGregor spewed:
> > >
> > > > Starports and why Planetary TLs are meaningless
> >
> > > > All Starships need "Routine Maintenance" once per year, right?  
> > > >Two weeks at any A or B class Starport, correct? The key word 
> > > >here is *any* A or B Class Starport - *not* "any A or B Class    
> > > >Starport of an equal or higher TL", but *any* such Starport.
> > > >
> > > > Note that, as the rules stand (TL Table on pg. 134) it is 
> > > >possible to score a Type A Starport on a minimum TL7 world and a 
> > > >Type B on a minimum of TL5 - though obviously in those cases 
> > > >*all* the tech must be imported!

	Actually you can have an A starport on a TL 5 world & a B 
starport on a TL 3 world if the planet has a type D (Religious 
Dictatorship) government (TL modifier -2) & no positive modifiers due to 
other factors, so the problem is even worse than you state.
> > > >
> > > > However, consider a TL9 world - just barely starfaring - with a 
> > > >Type A Starport. What happens when your TL12 Sylean Federation   
> > > >Scoutship wants an overhaul there (or your TL15 Third Imperium   
> > > >Scoutship, for that matter). Is there any delay? Is there any    
> > > >increased cost associated? *NO* to both!!!
> > >
> > > Overhaul?  Let's consider the 20th century Terran equivalent:
> > > automobiles.  Yes, the local garage is liable to have the oil,
> > > grease, filters, plugs, etc on hand to do your overhaul, but what 
> > > do you do if you need to replace the block?  Does Al's garage have 
> > >the engine in stock?  Probably not, he's going to need to call a   
> > >wrecking yard, or somebody who sells rebuilt engines, or           
> > >whatever...  Problem is that a TL 9 world isn't likely to have the 
> > >widget to fix that TL15 power plant on your far trader.  Especially 
> > >since they don't repair all that many of them.  They'll have to    
> > >send out for it.
> >
> >       The reason that this does not seem to make sense is that
> > it_does_not make sense.  The routine maintenance can be performed at 
> >any type A or B starport rule is WRONG & should be changed.  The rule 
> >should be Routine Maintenance may be performed at any type A or B    
> >starport of equal or higher tech level.  Yes theoretically starports 
> >could be importing higher tech parts & training but we               
> >have_no_evidence that they are.  There is some canonical evidence    
> >that suggests that ships do need to be maintained at facilities of   
> >their own Tech Level or higher, as follows.
> >      In The MegaTraveller Journal Issue #3 (by DGP) in an article on
> > Vincennes (A899AA6-G 1122 Deneb) Charles Kalina wrote "Civilian     
> >ships produced at Vincennes were of the highest performance &        
> >reliability, but their high-technology actually became a marketing   
> >liability.  As Vincennes' designs became more advanced, fewer & fewer 
> >starports were able to service & maintain these vessels...Currently  
> >the only TL-16 ships in civilian use are either merchants operating  
> >soley in the Vincennes area, or megacorporations for whom the        
> >advantages of TL-16 construction outweigh the expense of maintaining 
> >such vessels."
> >
> Is the Megatraveller Journal, striclty speaking, "canon" ... I        
> certainly would value Marc Miller's constant say-so in every Traveller 
> rulebook since Ctrav over a one off mention from a source that could  
> well be assumed by some to be non-canon! Even MTrav rules assumed that 
> maintenance was possible at any Starport, regardless of local TL!

	My post quite clearly said & you quoted & I requote "The routine 
maintenance may be performed at any type A or B starport rule is WRONG & 
should be changed.

	Yes, of course anything Marc Miller says is more canonical than 
anything anyone else says, especially if it is the rulebook itself, 
double especially if it is multiple rulebooks, but I disagree with this 
rule because it_does_not_make_sense.  The MegaTraveller Journal example 
did make sense & that is why I quoted it.
> 
> The problem with the example is that the Starport/Starships in 
>question are TL16 - that is, above the average imperial level for the 
>Third Imperium of c. 1100. I was (and I think I did specify - if I 
>didn't, I apologise) talking about the *average* imperial TL. Thus, for 
>Milieu 0 Starports capable of maintenance can be assumed to be able to 
>maintain ships of TL12 or less.

	Why is there any difference between importing higher TL starship 
parts that are only available from 1 source in the sector (TL 16 parts 
from Vincennes) & importing TL 15 starship parts that are only available 
from a handful of worlds in some(ie Spinward Marches)sectors. Or 
importing TL 12 parts from Sylea (the only TL 12 Starport A world 
described so far) in Milleau 0.

> 
> Your example is not relevant in the light of this. The constant 
>statements of Traveller rules that A/B Starports can maintain vessels, 
> with *NO* ifs, ands, or buts is more than enough "canon" ... or are 
>you arguing with Marc and not me? If you think that Marc has been wrong 
>since CTrav, well, take it up with *him*!!!

	Yes I guess I am arguing with Marc Miller & I guess I owe you an 
apology for arguing with you. However you advanced the notion that tech 
levels are meaningless partially based on this rule which I think is 
wrong & this is why I was responding to your argument.  Besides I'm not 
sure that I dare to argue with Marc Miller - I feel like a devout 
Catholic arguing theology with the Pope : )
> 
> >       If this ruling is made things will not only make more sense   
> >but we will also have a better (partial) explanation for why all     
> >those yards of less than maximum available tech level manage to stay 
> >in business; that is that they sell to customers who do not want to  
> >worry about if & where they can get their ship maintained.
> 
> Note that I *did* comment that the *real* reason the rule is as it is 
>is simply for the sake of simplicity! Makes perfect sense from that 
>point of view ... unfortunately, it doesn't make sense from any pov of 
>what we can loosely term "internal realism and consistency" *unless* 
>you assume as I do, and that is that local TLs are meaningless to a greater or lesser degree!

	I don't want simple if it conflicts with plausible.  I think 
this rule is implausible & that is why I am arguing it.  
> 
> >       Actually for maximum realism (& to make players lives more
> > difficult) the rule should probably be: Routine Maintenance may be
> > performed at any A or B starport of the ships tech level or the next
> > higher tech level only.  I would think that if you went to a TL-15
> > shipyard looking for maintenance on your TL-9 starship this would be
> > akin to bringing your Model A car (TL 6) into a modern garage (TL 8) for repairs & expected them to be able to fix it (& this is only a 2 
tech level differance, not 6).
> 
> It may well be that this *should* be the rule - but it isn't! CTrav, 
>MTrav, TNE and T4 *all* are in agreement that maintenance can be done 
>at *any* A/B Starport - and make no mention of TL of local starport 
>compared to TL of ship. Wishing it were different won't change the rock 
>solid facts.

	I think this rule is wrong & I think anyone who stops to think 
about it will realize this.  Yes the rulebooks say differently but so 
what.  All the rulebooks have had some errata ( ie errors).  It is not 
at all unreasonable to assume that this is just one of those errors that 
has been with us ever since CT & has not been fixed because no one has 
pointed out why it is wrong, that is part of the reason I'm discussing 
it now.
> 
> >       On a further note I would not want to have the routine
> > maintenance for_my_ship done at a type B starport.  What if they
> > discoved that the Jump Drive was worn & needed replacing, a type B  
> >port could not make one (by definition) & you would then have to get 
> >an import at a higher cost & expense, probably prepaid.
> 
> Why would a Type B not be able to make a Jump Drive? Starport type is
> independent of TL, pretty much.

	By definition a type B starport cannot build jump capable ships 
but can build non Jump capable ships.  The ONLY difference between a 
Jump capable ship & a non Jump capable ship is the Jump drive (& the 
hull grid) therefore QED Type B starports cannot make Jump Drives.

	Now I realize that most of the time annual maintenance will only 
require routine maintenance of the Jump drive & that a type B starport 
can do this just fine.  What I am saying is that the Jump Drive can wear 
out (In TNE terms aquire a high wear value) before the rest of the ship. 
 Then it will need replacing & since you might not KNOW the drive was 
that bad until they looked inside it during maintenance I would not want 
to schedule the maintenance for_my_ship at a type B starport, just in 
case the problem came up. It could just be that I am sensative to this 
problem because the group I play with tends to be hard on ships or 
perhaps our referee  (Hi Will) tends to designs things so that our Jump 
drives tend to wear out.  
> 
> >       These rules will also help the referee keep control of the
> > campaign because if the players must go to a planet with the        
> >appropriate  tech level for their maintenance the referee can insure 
> >that they will go there (or risk problems & misjumps, etc).  For     
> >example if you have a TL 15 ship in the Spinward Marches circa 1105  
> >you will only have about 5  planets in the whole sector who can fix  
> >it. (Glisten, Rhylanor, Mora, Trin, & debatably Darrian)
> 
> Again, yes, it makes perfect sense - except for the teeny little      
> problem that *all* iterations of Traveller state that maintenance can 
> be done at *any* A/B Starport, and make no mention of TL. And, again, 
> wishing the rules weren't what they are won't change the facts that   
> they *are* what they are!
>
> Phil

	Sorry about the length of the post, this argument has grown 
complicated enough that I was not sure what to snip from previous posts 
& still leave it comprehensible.

Happy Generic Winter Holiday Everone : )

Peter

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 23:00:09 -0500
From: 34zbtxq@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu (Susan M. Shock)
Subject: NAVAL ACADEMY and MARINES

        J.D. Burdick pointed out to us on #traveller tonight that the Naval
Academy as presented in T4 is almost IDENTICAL to the Military Academy,such
that it makes you wonder why there are two separate academies. After looking
at this, I decided to create my own Naval Academy to differentiate Naval
officers from their Military counterparts. Much of this is the same as the
original; no infringment is intended.

NAVAL ACADEMY (4 years)

PREREQUISITES: Social Standing 6+
               Age 20 or less

ADMISSION: 4-; DM+1 if Edu 9+; DM+2 if Soc A+
FAILED ADMISSION: No age penalty
PERSEVERANCE: 5-; DM+1 if End 9+; DM+2 if Int 9+
FLUNKED OUT: Spent 1d3 years
             Roll once per year on Academic Skills
             Enlistment in Navy as enlistee
ACADEMIC SKILLS (roll once per year)
        1. Tactics
        2. CHARISMA
        3. BUREAUCRACY
        4. TECHNICAL
        5. SPACECRAFT
        6. Computer

GRADUATION: Automatic enlistment in Navy at rank 01
HONORS: 7-; DM +1 if Int 9+; DM +1 if End B+
        Benefit: +1 Education. Can apply for Medical School.
        Automatic acceptance in Flight School in first term
        of military service   

Also, unlike previous versions of Traveller, Marines no longer get Gunnery
as one of their skills, thus reducing their usefulness aboard Naval vessels.
(In the "old" days, for example, marines served as gunners aboard naval
vessels).
I have decided to make an 'official' change in this regard, and am altering
#3 under Service Skills on the Marine character generation charts. This was
originally Gun Combat, and still leaves Marine characters with 2 other Gun
Combat entries on their charts. (Most of the "good skills" seem to occur twice).
        This was put out there for your consideration and use. Enjoy!

The above c. 1996 Far Future Enterprises inc.

                                        Allen Shock

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 12:48:12 +0900
From: Armand Suarez <suarez@on.rim.or.jp>
Subject: Traveller PBM

Has anyone tried the "Traveller the New Era" play-by-mail game by Eclipse 
Entertainment?  If so, please tell us what you thought of the game.

Thanks,

Armand

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 22:40:58 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Re: NAVAL ACADEMY and MARINES

On Wed, 25 Dec 1996, Susan M. Shock wrote:

> Also, unlike previous versions of Traveller, Marines no longer get Gunnery
> as one of their skills, thus reducing their usefulness aboard Naval vessels.
> (In the "old" days, for example, marines served as gunners aboard naval
> vessels).
> I have decided to make an 'official' change in this regard, and am altering
> #3 under Service Skills on the Marine character generation charts. This was
> originally Gun Combat, and still leaves Marine characters with 2 other Gun
> Combat entries on their charts. (Most of the "good skills" seem to occur twice).

Sounds like a good change, Allen (hey, I'm as much of a grognard as the 
next guy[G]).  But, I'm curious: do you plan on changing the Navy 
character generation to get rid of the Gunnery skills there, or will both 
have that skill available?

Perhaps put melee combat under Physical, and either Pilot or another 
entry of Technical under Career?  Hmmm.


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)
       .....Official Reporter of Imperium Games Product Info.....

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 01:45:13 -0500
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Tech and Starports

>> Starports and why Planetary TLs are meaningless
>> 
>> Some of you will remember my comments to the effect that, with
>> interstellar cargo transport costing a mere 1000 Cr per ton, there
>> is absolutely *no* relevance in what a planetary TL *supposedly* is
>> - they simply import (as do LDCs on Terra today). The *only*
>> relevance may be cost (increased - not hugely over the going rate on
>
>Consider all the following:
>
>1)  Does the low tech world need the item?  Is it important to the 
>infrastructure of the world's economy?  (Remember, cost to import 
>relatively needless items CAN outstrip the world's ability to buy 
>them, use the Africa example again, for example)
>
>2)  Can the low tech world's infrastructure support the item?  (What 
>good would a cellular phone do you in Rwanda?)  

A good example of these points is from _Hammer's Slammers_, where 
the Slammers are unloading on an agri-world and meet up with an ex-
Slammer on crutches who has settled there:

        "Hey, Blacky," he continued with concern, "what's wrong with
your legs? We got the best there was."
        "Oh, thery're fine," Rob heard the old man reply, "but they need a 
weekly tuning. Out here we don't have the computers, you know; so I
get the astrogation boys to sync me up on the ships' hardware when-
ever one docks in--just waiting for a chance now. But in six months
the servos are far enough out of line that I have to shut off the power
till the next ship arrives. You'd be surprised how well I get around
on these pegs, though..."

- --Paul Darius Owensby   Athens, GA      26 Dec, 1996  0245

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 17:19:48 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Oh dear...(was "Economics...")

In mail you write:

> The price that the merchant gets for selling is far less than if they
> managed to sell in developed countries, but still better than paying
> for waste disposal.                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Keep the above in mind. I'll come back to it later.

> A phenomenon of the technological society in which we live (TL8 or
> thereabouts) is that as goods/devices/production processes become
> more sophisticated, a country becomes *more* dependent on
> international (in T4 read interstellar) trade. Those starship
> components might not be repairable on planet, regardless of the skill
> of your technicians.  Those particular components just might be
> disposable...see how many computer technicians would try to repair a
> broken CPU, memory chip or hard drive on your busted machine. Hell,
> they might be *able* to do it, but it probably isn't worth their
> while.
      
> Why would you spend an hour, at a staff cost of $25-, to repair a
> $10- component? Why would you spend a week to repair a $500-
> component?  The answer: you wouldn't. Not unless there was no way to
> get a cheap replacement, and your customer was desperate enough to
> *pay* the extra!

First off, as one gets more aware of the *real* costs of waste
disposal, and recycling gets better, the incentive to fix rather than
throw away goes up. There *is* a cost to the "just throw it out"
culture, and I rather expect that an interstellar society will have
learned this (the hard way if nothing else!).

Second, while it may "cost" $25 of tech time to fix the $10 part,
importing the part may cost more. And even if it *doesn't*, you also
have to consider the cost of the downtime of the system (or *ship*!)
that the component is part of. That can run into thousands an hour. 

Also, if the local starport has to import parts, then "recycling"
modules by salvageing the good parts *is* good use of manpower. And
that means that having a tech repairing modules with salvaged parts is
*also* good use of resources. If nothing else, it gives low-level techs
practice on higher tech systems, and keeps them busy during slack times.

So if the parts aren't produced locally, but *are* "standardized"
modules, then repair *is* a good idea. After all, the port *will* have
to have the gear to test modules to make sure that they are ok for use,
thus repairing modules by swapping parts *is* doable, even if they
can't *make* the parts.

A chip that is "burned out" isn't fixable. But a chip that has had a
connection between the actual "chip" and the connectors in the chip
carrier fail *is* repairable. And at a lot lower tech level (and
expense) than making or importing a new one. All you need is a way to
open the carrier non-destructively, a clean room, and the right
"welding" technology to re-attach the wire.

The same goes for things like Hard drives. Some of us "poor folk"
repair obsolete HDs by finding ones with bad media, and using the
circuit board to repair ones with bad boards. There are companies that
do the same thing, because it *is* cheap. They also open drives that
have bad media, salvage any platters that are still ok, and rebuild
drives from the salvaged platters and repaired circuit boards.

This is done right here in the US. I'm willing to bet that countries
that can't make HDs use the board swap trick rather than import new
drives. And ones that have the ability to repair the circuit boards
will do that, as it's still cheaper than a new drive. I'm not too sure
that there are many places that can salvage media but not construct
drives. 

Do note that in Traveller, *any* spaceport will have "clean room"
capability, simply by going into space a ways (to get away from the
crud the ships leave around). Or by playing games with life support
gear. 

Oh yeah, on worlds that still use Vacuum Tube technology, if there's
significant traffic thru the port, there *will* be a high port, with a
vacuum tube factory in it. Transporting the parts and workers will be
worth it for the high quality vacuum. If the traffic is lower (thus
requiring "dedicated" shuttle flights to/from the facility) there won't
be a factory, but there will be a research facility. After all, it's
*much* simpler to work on experimental designs by wearing a suit and
just having the anode, cathode, grid, etc in an evacuated compartment.
Adjustments become simple matters instead of a complex mess.

Oh yeah, I expect that Atm 0 worlds may use vacuum tube technology for
some things simply because it's easier to maintain that the more
advanced stuff. At least, easier for *them*. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 17:53:30 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Routine Maintenance

In mail you write:

>         Actually for maximum realism (& to make players lives more 
> difficult) the rule should probably be: Routine Maintenance may be 
> performed at any A or B starport of the ships tech level or the next 
> higher tech level only.  I would think that if you went to a TL-15 
> shipyard looking for maintenance on your TL-9 starship this would be 
> akin to bringing your Model A car (TL 6) into a modern garage (TL 8) for 
> repairs & expected them to be able to fix it (& this is only a 2 tech 
> level differance, not 6).

Better try comparing *ships*. You'll find that it'll take a *lot* of
tech levels difference before you can't get the work done. For example,
you could probably get the Monitor or the Merrimac worked on at any
modern shipyard as long as you had a copy of the plans. They'd just
*make* the parts. Machining them would be no trouble, not for yards
that can produce/repair things like modern steam turbines. 

You'd still be able to get wooden-hulled sailing ships fixed too, as
folks still use similar things for pleasure craft. 

So likewise, repairing lower tech level ships is doable. They're liable
to wind up *making* parts if they don't get many ships of your tech
level, but that *won't* be hard. 

Real world example. Since it's so hard to get the tubes needed for
restoring some classic radios, and the demand isn't high enough to get
manufacturers to start producing them, there are modules you can buy
that plug into the tube socket and work just like one. They use various
*modern* parts to achieve the same effect, and don't cost huge amounts
of money. 

That's the key here. Where the module isn't readily avialable due to
being much lower tech, a higher tech replacement can *easily* be made
at a cost that won't be that much out of line. If it later fails while
you are at an lower tech port, big deal. You just replace it with the
"right" part.

Believe me, if there were any significant number of ships of a given
design made, there *will* be replacement parts available. At higher
tech ports they may be small modules inside a much large "case" shaped
to fit the assembly properly. But they'll exist. 

Going back to your example of cars, you *can* buy parts for a Model A.
You have a choice of "original" parts (very expensive and hard to
find), "reproduction" parts (ones made in the same manner and to the
same specs), and "replacement" parts.

Original and repro are as alike as can be managed, though collectors
prefer original parts if they can get them. Replacement parts are made
by modern methods, using modern tech, and are likely to look rather
strange bolted onto the old parts. But they work. If you want to get
really silly you can put a solid state ignition system on an old Model
A or Model T. Though that does require adding something equivalent to
the aftermarket "electric starter" kits that were available back then. :-)

>         On a further note I would not want to have the routine 
> maintenance for_my_ship done at a type B starport.  What if they 
> discoved that the Jump Drive was worn & needed replacing, a type B port 
> could not make one (by definition) & you would then have to get an 
> import at a higher cost & expense, probably prepaid.

Unless you did something stupid, they'd discover that it needs
replacing of <some major subassembly> "soon". Otherwise your engineer
would have noticed something. And in that case, you try to figure if
you can get it to a Class A port "soon".

>         These rules will also help the referee keep control of the 
> campaign because if the players must go to a planet with the appropriate 
>  tech level for their maintenance the referee can insure that they will 
> go their (or risk problems & misjumps, etc).  For example if you have a 
> TL 15 ship in the Spinward Marches circa 1105 you will only have about 5 
>  planets in the whole sector who can fix it. (Glisten, Rhylanor, Mora, 
> Trin, & debatably Darrian)

One the other hand, with a TL-9 ship, you can get the work done almost
anywhere, but you may get a few strange looks. "You're flying a *what*?!"

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #790
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
