Fuel Cost for Takeoff and Landing for Dropships

[Zematus737]

Considering that there is no available data on what the fuel cost would be for dropships going planet side to land or takeoff, I found this information necessary for campaign play that is not just abstract or time based.  I needed the fuel cost for such an activity so I can measure the time required for refueling.  Older rules for Cargo Transport and its tables for fueling drogues as heavy platforms has been removed from the most current SO:AA, but it is 4 tons a minute(Heavy Cargo Platform) x5 for liquid=20 tons a minute per drogue.  In vaccuum x0.75 modifier.  Terran gravity x0.20.

Fuel Cost for Takeoff and Landing for Dropships

Taking the tonnage or mass of the unit, divided by safe thrust value as the cost of takeoff for the unit in points on the tactical scale.  Landing would be half the cost of takeoff.

[Tonnage/Safethrust=tactical fuel point cost]
Fuel Tables: SO:AA pg 135 TM pg 186

Some examples of takeoff values:
Union at 3,600mass/3 ST=1200;  215 tons of fuelx30=6450 - 1200(18%)=5374(83%) remaining
Leopard 3056 1,900mass/4 st=475; 100x40=4000 - 475 (12%)=3525 (88%) remaining
Mule 2737 11,200mass/3=3733;  319x30=9570 - 3733(39%)=5837(61%) remaining

To find the Alphastrike or Battleforce fuel costs, simply reduce the strategic fuel points by the percentages taken from the tactical calculations.  Now you have the costs for takeoff and landing for dropships in Interstellar Operations. 

May you have many hydrogen reserves and healthy logistics.

[Daryk]

For some reason, I thought it was a flat one ton of fuel?

[Zematus737]

For some reason, I thought it was a flat one ton of fuel?

I can't recall seeing any rule on fuel burn for lift off or landing that isn't referring to fuel so much as to movement.  That's probably what you saw for lift off.  The movement cost. 

The Saturn V weighed about 3k tons and burned some 20 tons of fuel per second.  1st stage was over 2 minutes.  The Falcon 9 weighed about 1.5k tons and burned about 500 tons of fuel.  I don't know how efficient ships will be in the 3rd millennium.  I didn't see any stages on dropships that are supposed to lift and drop off.  Who can say.  I'm not a rocket scientist, but I needed some numbers and made something up that appears to be manageable and easy to figure.

[Daryk]

The flat one ton may be old Aerotech rules... currently, I think they're just paying for the movement.  I'll see what I can find...

[Daryk]

Ok, TW page 88 says two thrust points for a horizontal takeoff but doesn't seem to give a cost for vertical.  Landing is on the previous page but without any thrust cost.

[Daryk]

And page 60 of StratOps (AAR) has all the costs on that page.  The section starts at the bottom of the first column and is most of the second column.

[Zematus737]

And page 60 of StratOps (AAR) has all the costs on that page.  The section starts at the bottom of the first column and is most of the second column.

True enough!  There it is.
'When taking off from a ground map using a vertical liftoff (see p. 88, TW), any vehicle expends 1 thrust point and fuel point per 0.5Gs of local gravity, rounded up, and is placed on the appropriate hex of the atmospheric map in a hover (0 hexes per turn). The vehicle may not expend additional thrust that turn, representing thrust being constrained to avoid damaging the vehicle with backblast from the ground during launch.'

So, take off would be 2 points of fuel on Terra (1.0g).  It's far cheaper than I would have imagined.  And it's much better for the horizontal landings for SC with a rolling landing, being that cost of 1 fuel point, as you said.  There is really no sense in tracking fuel if this is the case.  Who would ever use non-jump ship travel between systems to put fuel or time to the test.  You'd spend more on crew supplies than fuel.

[Daryk]

Indeed... the ridiculously low fuel consumption has been chalked up to KF physics in the fusion reactor.  It's another one of those "don't look too close" things... ;)

[Zematus737]

Interesting.  I had always thought that the KF drive was independent of the propulsion systems.

[Daryk]

The drives are completely separate, it's just that Kearny and Fuchida started with inconsistencies they noticed in fusion reactors and their theories eventually gave us FTL travel.