Author Topic: Range Limits of Jumpships  (Read 4506 times)

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10662
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #30 on: 29 October 2023, 13:51:42 »
The universe in reality isn't neatly sliced into increments of ten, why should jump travel be neatly sliced into similar nice, round numbers?  Earth's orbit is not neatly 365 24 hour days, hell, our rotation isn't even a full 24 hours.

It's all got variables and variations.  30LY is an average because existence doesn't (and shouldn't) come  in neatly precalculated packages.

It's not Exactly 30 LY, because the universe doesn't come in exact scaling measurements.  It's all built to tolerances, with variation and variables.  your car doesn't get Exactly the mileage (Kilometerage?) that it says on the sales brochure, that's an average worked out in testing by taking a lot of samples, and dividing the sum.

so too, I would suggest, for Jumpship travel.  Some Merchants can stretch further, call 'em "Wednesday Cores", while others fall short (Friday and Monday cores)-but they all can just about reach 30 LY, more or less.

It's the floor, below which, the product is too defective to sell.

But they're not going to promise you 31, 35, or 40 LY at the dealership, because not all of 'em can do that...but at the shipyard dealer, they won't sell you a core that can't make 30LY out of the box once that became the standardized expectation-they'll grind it up and reprocess it instead until they can sell you a core that will MAKE 30 LY...even if you're only going to ever make a 5LY hop between two close-knit stars.

Because they can sell it to at a given price point (well, sell it to the bank who'll repossess it from you if you can't make your payments.)

It's like when GM would built a model of car, and some of the cars off the line can pull 47 miles/gallon out of a downdraft carb, but the average is going to be 15-that's what they put on the sticker, and any of that model that can't make 15 gets reworked, because if it gets out that they're selling bum vehicles, banks won't do the financing.

Basically, for a Standard Jumpship then, 30 LY is the average range that the shipping industry settled on for "we can finance this at a good rate".  Further WOULD be better, but it's not reliable enough to keep the yard working, so they don't claim to tolerance or manufacture past 30 LY. (after which, you start getting weird accidents, see for example, SLS manassas).

So why 30LY? it's a decent chance in a unvierse like Battletech, that there's going to be habitable something within 30LY of a given star, and enough of them WERE habitable that this became a baseline expectation for "We're probably going to go this far in a single jump at least once, usually more than once".

which lets the manufacturer have tolerances that are reasonably repeatable with the core-casting or core-forging gear they have.

and it covers most potential clients' needs.

This, in turn, would influence MILITARY suppliers (compact cores, subcompacts) because if your fleet's movements aren't predictable, (aka you don't know how far any given ship of a given class can actually go reliably) then your navy's not going to be much good, and being able to jump as far as Bill McHukster in his Merchant makes your space soldiers a laughingstock when they come to enforce the rules.

and nobody wants that.


can you find a ship that can go further on a jump? with enough money, but you're not going to find two that can do it with any reliability minus being the conglomerate that owns all the merchant banking and the lion's share of communications...and that conglomerate or goofy cult? has a vested interest in maintaining the appearance of 30LY being an absolute, as opposed to average, limit.

after all, they own parts of everyone else's yards too, and there's a decided financial and strategic motive to keep things...stable...ish.
"If you have to ask permission, then it's no longer a Right, it has been turned into a Privilege-something that can be and will be taken from you when convenient."

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4497
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #31 on: 29 October 2023, 21:56:43 »
0.2 LY is more than a little too much to overcome with conventional thrust.

No, that little bit past 30 light years - that 0.2 LY we're talking about - is over 12,600 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun.  The week-long transit from the jump point to Earth is about 8-9 AU, so there's no way someone's simply relying on maneuvering drives to make up that distance.  That's something like 1500 weeks of transit time, or near thirty years.

Space is big.


That would leave orbital rotations and average jump distance.

PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1849
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #32 on: 30 October 2023, 03:53:37 »
Yeah. 0.2 LY is ridiculously long range, after all. 12600AU is not a kidding. There is a reason why AU is only used in solar system.

theagent

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 345
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #33 on: 31 October 2023, 20:10:36 »
0.2LY wouldn't be quite so bad...but I still wouldn't recommend the trip.

  • Assuming you have to account for galactic drift, let's say you have to actually travel 0.3LY.  That's 18,972.0531 AU, or 2.83822 trillion km.
  • Assuming you're going to use constant thrust the entire way, first accelerating towards the turnover point to decelerate, we'll cut that in half:  0.15LY, 9,486.0265 AU, or 1.81911 trillion km.
  • Assuming starting velocity (v0) is 0mps, & that our start part is "0" (x0), and assuming 1g acceleration (so that we can convert the burn times to burn-days), the formula is X = X0 + v0t + (at2)/2, which simplifies down to X = (at^2)/2.  We have X & a but don't know t, so we rewrite to solve t:  t = SQRT (2X/a).
  • Substituting for X (1.81911x1015m) and a (9.80665m/s2), we get t = SQRT (1.44709x1014), which works out to 12,029,501.39 seconds, or 3,341.5282 hours, or 139.23 days. That's the time to accelerate, so double it to 279.46 days for the entire trip.
  • So you would need enough fuel for roughly 280 burn-days...or almost 40 weeks of travel.
  • FYI...when you reach turnover, your ship will be approaching 0.4c (0.3935026c, to be exact), so don't hit any rogue asteroids

That's a lot of fuel & life support to have on hand.

But it could be worse.  If you only had, say, 43 burn-days of fuel, you could use 21 burn-days to accelerate, save back 1 burn-day as a reserve, & plan on using the remaining 21 burn-days to decelerate closer to your target...but you'll end up spending two and a half years in freefall as you coast from shut-down to turnover (total trip time 944.1 days, roughly 2.58 years).  Your life support would run out well before that.  Even if you could extend to 90 burn-days each way, you'd still have almost 341 days between burns.

Frabby

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4267
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #34 on: 01 November 2023, 01:40:12 »
The universe in reality isn't neatly sliced into increments of ten, why should jump travel be neatly sliced into similar nice, round numbers?  Earth's orbit is not neatly 365 24 hour days, hell, our rotation isn't even a full 24 hours.

It's all got variables and variations.  30LY is an average because existence doesn't (and shouldn't) come  in neatly precalculated packages.

It's not Exactly 30 LY, because the universe doesn't come in exact scaling measurements.
Right up to this point I agree with you.

But I don’t think the car manufacturing/mileage comparison works. It’s a good argument but it is entirely based in real-world economics. Within the FASAnomics of the BattleTech universe or when viewed from a LosTech angle, the argument unfortunately falls apart.

You could say my mileage varies. ;)
Sarna.net BattleTechWiki Admin
Author of the BattleCorps stories Feather vs. Mountain, Rise and Shine, Proprietary, Trial of Faith & scenario Twins

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #35 on: 01 November 2023, 03:45:24 »
0.2LY wouldn't be quite so bad...but I still wouldn't recommend the trip.

  • Assuming you have to account for galactic drift, let's say you have to actually travel 0.3LY.  That's 18,972.0531 AU, or 2.83822 trillion km.
  • Assuming you're going to use constant thrust the entire way, first accelerating towards the turnover point to decelerate, we'll cut that in half:  0.15LY, 9,486.0265 AU, or 1.81911 trillion km.
  • Assuming starting velocity (v0) is 0mps, & that our start part is "0" (x0), and assuming 1g acceleration (so that we can convert the burn times to burn-days), the formula is X = X0 + v0t + (at2)/2, which simplifies down to X = (at^2)/2.  We have X & a but don't know t, so we rewrite to solve t:  t = SQRT (2X/a).
  • Substituting for X (1.81911x1015m) and a (9.80665m/s2), we get t = SQRT (1.44709x1014), which works out to 12,029,501.39 seconds, or 3,341.5282 hours, or 139.23 days. That's the time to accelerate, so double it to 279.46 days for the entire trip.
  • So you would need enough fuel for roughly 280 burn-days...or almost 40 weeks of travel.
  • FYI...when you reach turnover, your ship will be approaching 0.4c (0.3935026c, to be exact), so don't hit any rogue asteroids

That's a lot of fuel & life support to have on hand.

But it could be worse.  If you only had, say, 43 burn-days of fuel, you could use 21 burn-days to accelerate, save back 1 burn-day as a reserve, & plan on using the remaining 21 burn-days to decelerate closer to your target...but you'll end up spending two and a half years in freefall as you coast from shut-down to turnover (total trip time 944.1 days, roughly 2.58 years).  Your life support would run out well before that.  Even if you could extend to 90 burn-days each way, you'd still have almost 341 days between burns.

My calcs for 0.2LY is about 330 days [real time, 319 with time dilation]

159 days burn, a few hours drifting, than turnover and 159 days of deceleration. You reach 42% of light in the process.

The issue is for such a long trip you can't really use the standard calculation because relativistic effects are starting to come into play.

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10662
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #36 on: 01 November 2023, 09:13:13 »
Right up to this point I agree with you.

But I don’t think the car manufacturing/mileage comparison works. It’s a good argument but it is entirely based in real-world economics. Within the FASAnomics of the BattleTech universe or when viewed from a LosTech angle, the argument unfortunately falls apart.

You could say my mileage varies. ;)

When you're looking  at any product, you're looking at tolerances.  the smaller the item the easier it is to keep tolerance-to a point, the larger scale the item the wider the tolerances are going to be.

Compare a jet aircraft with tolerances down to plus or minus .003 inches versus a skyscraper where 1/8th of an inch is considered 'too close to measure" (and that's just rude structure, not even the moving parts).

I used the mileage example because it's something most people can immediately grasp and envision.

the other reason, is the existence of 'single jumps' that per the Sarna, couldn't happen if the 30LY were a fixed number that could not be exceeded fairly routinely.  It makes more sense, for 30LY to be the "achievable average performance for a production ship" and thus, become the baseline standard for ALL Production ships-because they can achieve it as a minimum performance standard and not bankrupt every shipyard that tries to exceed it on the regular.  (that last .0005% of precision uses hundreds of times more money, time and resources, than the preceeding 99.995%)

I work in industry-as in work in industry, (as opposed to sitting in meetings).  Flaws are inevitable, that's why we have tolerances in the first place-to average out the flaws in order to get a set performance out of the product.

You could shave a few TONS off of most jet airliners if you could somehow make the structure parts to the bare minimum thickness required to meet the spec.  The problem is, there are variations in the alloys, variations in the processing, variations in the manufacturing and variations in the assembly and you'd have to scrap ten planes to get one that works by doing that.

to stay in business (and keep the customers going) there have to be tolerances worked into the build-an allowable slop...but that slop has to meet a minimum performance standard or your airframe is shit.

so I see 30LY as the performance minimum that's been adopted across the industry, and, thanks to 300 years of killing scientists and engineers and burning books, it's become accepted as an ultimate limit because anyone with the skills to exceed it on a repeatable, regular basis? died a long time ago and whatever they knew died with them.
"If you have to ask permission, then it's no longer a Right, it has been turned into a Privilege-something that can be and will be taken from you when convenient."

theagent

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 345
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #37 on: 01 November 2023, 19:32:12 »
My calcs for 0.2LY is about 330 days [real time, 319 with time dilation]

159 days burn, a few hours drifting, than turnover and 159 days of deceleration. You reach 42% of light in the process.

The issue is for such a long trip you can't really use the standard calculation because relativistic effects are starting to come into play.

Close enough, probably.  Although at least time dilation isn't too bad (only losing 11 days, for example, from a 330-day trip isn't too bad). 

It's when you start getting significantly above 0.6c that the time-dilation starts to get really bad.  Losing 20% of the time at 0.6c is going to start really playing havoc with your time calculations, losing 40% at 0.8c makes it even worse, & I really wouldn't want to push it to the point of hitting .9c or higher.  Hell, I'm not familiar enough with astrophysics to even calculate how the acceleration curves would get modified as time-dilation starts affecting the vehicle...

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37730
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #38 on: 01 November 2023, 19:36:39 »
Lorentz equations aren't that bad... it's just math, after all... :)

DevianID

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1774
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #39 on: 02 November 2023, 02:21:14 »
For Lorentz to factor we would need to know if the increased mass of the ship was not countered by the increased mass of propellent.  Since the propellent of our torch ships is not defined other then "it works" its fair to assume Lorentz doesnt matter for torch ships at 'merely' 40% C.

Also, jumpships seem to already handle the drift velocity between stars, so you shouldnt need to treat a .2ly missjump as .3ly due to drift, as drift has to be factored out already or you'd jump to a zenith point only to see your target star whizz by you.

Edit: Im no loremaster but i'd assume that a 'real' jump would rely on the space distortion from gravity to punch its hole through space to teleport.  So you probably cant 'dead space' jump even if you wanted to, you need to connect to the space distortion and set your reference frame velocity.  I mentioned it earlier but more or less since they dont do deadspace jumps to, for example, very very easily travel from clan space or periphery space in the civil war to terra with 0 chance of detection, then there SHOULD be a reason for this.
« Last Edit: 02 November 2023, 02:28:38 by DevianID »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4497
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #40 on: 03 November 2023, 16:54:35 »
"Dead space"? As in jumping to a point between systems? I'm pretty sure it's been done. It just isn't a favorite place to go without lots of fuel, or a Lithium-Fusion Battery.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37730
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #41 on: 03 November 2023, 17:25:44 »
Jump "points" are defined by a maximum gravitational field... anything outside of that field is fair game for a jump.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4497
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #42 on: 03 November 2023, 17:30:10 »
Thanks. I thought that was the case.

PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1849
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #43 on: 04 November 2023, 01:57:34 »
That is doable I think. Usually you don't have a reason for this for you need a lots of fuel to recharge the battery without an aid for a star. But if you are at least one among criminal(include pirate), soldier who is in charge of attack a system and you want to be unnoticed until you can reach to the target system, spy, or ComStar Explorer Corps or various other explorer, then it is still an option.

Yes for normal merchants and civilians, as well as the soldier on their own nation right now, you don't need to waste the fuel like that since you can use the local star's wind instead.

edit: It's from the other game series, but I have seen Praetorian of Dorn, the novel of Horus Heresy, that the enemy legion attempt to ambush by jump the fleet far away from the distance than the defenders are able to aware their jump, then using their thrusters to advance for around a half of year(or a full year? I don't recall it correctly) to remain unnoticed until they are very close to the system's defense stations.

So, if you have enough ships to spare, supply, and more importantly, time to prepare, then it is not entirely impossible to jump far from the standard jump points then ambush the enemy without an electromagnetic pulse that could be detected by the defenders.

Although I wonder that, even if their destination is farther than the standard jump point, but still their arrival leaves the electromagnetic pulse anyways, and as you know you cannot hide anything on space; will the defender's observatory remain unnoticed such a light far from the system, but still very closer than the other star? A system that makes you to decide such a costly scheme, that surely have the advanced observatory as well as the defending fleet as well?
« Last Edit: 04 November 2023, 02:16:31 by PuppyLikesLaserPointers »

Intermittent_Coherence

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1165
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #44 on: 04 November 2023, 02:01:24 »
Ehhh... Any fictional FTL has limitations. It's baked into the setting and informs it. 30LY seems arbitrary but it's been around for a while and works as well as any.

It doesn't have to be a hard limit. Maybe there are exceptions. Maybe this yard has better build quality that can do a bit more. Maybe this other yard adds a proprietary widget to their products that allows them to squeeze a bit more. Maybe some crews are just that good. All these add flavor to a setting.

It's also a way to add narrative tension. Everybody knows doing more than 30 is high stakes gambling with everybody's lives, but what if they have to get to someplace (or away from someplace) real quick? Cue the exception.

AlphaMirage

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3704
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #45 on: 04 November 2023, 09:00:33 »
That is doable I think. Usually you don't have a reason for this for you need a lots of fuel to recharge the battery without an aid for a star. But if you are at least one among criminal(include pirate), soldier who is in charge of attack a system and you want to be unnoticed until you can reach to the target system, spy, or ComStar Explorer Corps or various other explorer, then it is still an option.

Yes for normal merchants and civilians, as well as the soldier on their own nation right now, you don't need to waste the fuel like that since you can use the local star's wind instead.

So, if you have enough ships to spare, supply, and more importantly, time to prepare, then it is not entirely impossible to jump far from the standard jump points then ambush the enemy without an electromagnetic pulse that could be detected by the defenders.

Although I wonder that, even if their destination is farther than the standard jump point, but still their arrival leaves the electromagnetic pulse anyways, and as you know you cannot hide anything on space; will the defender's observatory remain unnoticed such a light far from the system, but still very closer than the other star? A system that makes you to decide such a costly scheme, that surely have the advanced observatory as well as the defending fleet as well?

It doesn't use that much more fuel and as it is hydrogen it is pretty cheap and available onboard the dropships it carries if not its own internal supply. I argue in my Free Trader's Guide that such a 'burner' operation would be the default during periods of abundance as you can shave almost a day of charge to jump with no penalty and it would be more consistent than using sails. Sails would of course still be used but that would be more of a pacing issue up to the jump captain.

15 AU is the detection limit for a jump emergence so just jumping beyond Uranus will make your appearance difficult to detect by the emergence wave at least. You could also jump at an eccentric point off the planetary disk, to somewhere not visible from the target continent on that planet. That could help conceal your thrusters as you approach as few systems have a space based detection grid, it is more likely to be ground based.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4497
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #46 on: 04 November 2023, 19:21:42 »
That is doable I think. Usually you don't have a reason for this for you need a lots of fuel to recharge the battery without an aid for a star. But if you are at least one among criminal(include pirate), soldier who is in charge of attack a system and you want to be unnoticed until you can reach to the target system, spy, or ComStar Explorer Corps or various other explorer, then it is still an option.
(snip)

I think regular merchants might use such areas as well if it's the best way between two planets. If the route is travelled enough there might even be a recharge station there.

PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1849
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #47 on: 04 November 2023, 23:45:56 »
It doesn't use that much more fuel and as it is hydrogen it is pretty cheap and available onboard the dropships it carries if not its own internal supply. I argue in my Free Trader's Guide that such a 'burner' operation would be the default during periods of abundance as you can shave almost a day of charge to jump with no penalty and it would be more consistent than using sails. Sails would of course still be used but that would be more of a pacing issue up to the jump captain.

15 AU is the detection limit for a jump emergence so just jumping beyond Uranus will make your appearance difficult to detect by the emergence wave at least. You could also jump at an eccentric point off the planetary disk, to somewhere not visible from the target continent on that planet. That could help conceal your thrusters as you approach as few systems have a space based detection grid, it is more likely to be ground based.

You don't need to exit too far from the destination planet, then. Maybe some systems have artificial satellite for surveillance but it also needs the maintenance that not all systems can afford that.


I think regular merchants might use such areas as well if it's the best way between two planets. If the route is travelled enough there might even be a recharge station there.

Perhaps, although costly, but it is possible and also worth considering to make a refueling station on the stopover sites even if the area has no habitable planets - or the space don't even have a star nearby! Although you need to keep fed the station with not only the food for the staff as well as the hydrogen if its position lacks a star nearby(thus it also lacks a jovian planet nearby as well), but if it increase the overall tranport quantity then the larger government might consider make one. I don't have in mind about any of but some kind of those station could be already exists in battletech universe and I won't be surprised even if it's true.
« Last Edit: 04 November 2023, 23:53:18 by PuppyLikesLaserPointers »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4497
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #48 on: 07 November 2023, 18:23:25 »
Perhaps, although costly, but it is possible and also worth considering to make a refueling station on the stopover sites even if the area has no habitable planets - or the space don't even have a star nearby! Although you need to keep fed the station with not only the food for the staff as well as the hydrogen if its position lacks a star nearby(thus it also lacks a jovian planet nearby as well), but if it increase the overall tranport quantity then the larger government might consider make one. I don't have in mind about any of but some kind of those station could be already exists in battletech universe and I won't be surprised even if it's true.


I don't think every jump area would have one. Just the most heavily travelled. It'd also make sense that the House would pay for it as it keep their economy moving. Hauling supplies to the station could be done in trade for a recharge.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37730
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #49 on: 07 November 2023, 18:25:30 »
There are enough dwarf stars between habitable worlds to not have to build a recharge station that needs constant refueling in completely dead space.

PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1849
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #50 on: 08 November 2023, 06:34:10 »
Yeah. If you want to make it, then there would be many jumpships want to use that as the waypoint.

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #51 on: 08 November 2023, 09:43:09 »
Honestly, the most likely to exist [in terms of having lots of traffic and some, any, sorta infrastructure] are systems that used to be inhabited prior to the 1SW that are well placed for short-cuts.

https://imgur.com/a/4z1HHVz

Take this for example.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37730
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #52 on: 08 November 2023, 18:28:25 »
Yeah, Meinhof in that example is EXACTLY the kind of system that would have a recharge station.

quewin

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #53 on: 10 November 2023, 20:06:21 »
Expanding on your thought, how much of the recorded colonization during the Star League era was simply building (recharge) station(s) in transit systems? How many of these were abandoned simply because the infrastructure could no longer be maintained?

All those canon Clan Waypoints and Transfer Stations (that disappeared) certainly provide a precedent.

An even more interesting possibility with somewhere like Meinhof is that its infrastructure could have reasonably been built (and owned) by General Motors itself.
« Last Edit: 10 November 2023, 20:09:33 by quewin »

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37730
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Range Limits of Jumpships
« Reply #54 on: 10 November 2023, 20:11:12 »
That's exactly what I was thinking... by that point, private enterprise could totally afford to support a recharge station... ;)

 

Register