On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 05:55:31PM -0700, Evyn MacDude wrote:
>
> ============================================================
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 11:43 AM Christopher Sean Hilton - chris at vindaloo.com
> (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>
>     This morning I got up and I was thinking about routes in Traveller. I'm
>     specifically thinking about representing routes in a database and the fact
>     that these routes are effectively a *[mathematical graph.][1]* I'm thinking
>     that there should be at least two, and possibly three _graphs_ in the
>     Imperium:
>
>     - Trade Routes, or the trade network or graph;
>     - X-Boat Routes;
>     - And a possible non-public information network using Jump-5 or Jump-6
>       courier ships to judiciously carry information and intelligence for
>       the Imperial Royal family, a small subset of their friends, and the
>       Military, the _Shadow Intelligence_ network.
>
>
> Sure open that Can of worms.... 8-)
>
> Ok, since the Traveller map is T5 compliant, the importance number controls main
> trade routes there. Main Routes are between Important
> worlds i.e. Importance 4 or better, with up to a J4 link between them... From there
> on can assume that lesser important worlds routes will trend
> toward the closest one.
>
> Recently I have been playing with J3 ships and the routes they take, primarily the
> subsidized Liner. Which by the rules 7 worlds on the average.
> Note Subsidized Merchants are the only ones that Mail Contracts are available to,
> currently my assumption is that they provide the bulk of
> Tradition mail service, i.e. physical and some electronic.
>
> Now the Xboats/Scout networks provide primary Electronic Mail, again these have
> fixed routes of service as well. With the speed of Comms being
> limited to how far away from a Xboat hub you are.
>

Might not X-Boats provide "long-haul" message transport along the
X-Boat routes with mail carrying subsidized merchants handling the
"last parsec"?

> As for other networks I assume that the Navy has its own courier service based on
> the locations of the various Naval bases with the Navel Depots being
> the central hubs and core network architecture. While other groups will have their
> own routes based on their needs.
>
>
>
>     I've always assumed that trade routes are bidirectional. A trade route or
>     _edge_ that connects system A to system B, can be used to travel A --> B or B
>     --> A. Mathematically, the trade route graph is not _directed_.
>
>
> Actually this is a good question, Big Ships serving to haul resources from a source
> to where they are used, probably often making the outgoing leg underloaded.
> But these will be on well defined routes dedicated to that purpose, and will run
> when they are loaded instead of a tight schedule.
>
> Then there is mixed Freight and Passenger service which serving fixed routes will
> probably either be a line or circular in nature, the line going out to the end and
> comes back hitting the same worlds on both legs or a circuit that ends where it
> starts. Also note availability of refined fuel will probably be a factor of these
> lines as well.
>

If the graph contains _cycles_ or loops, it's possible that working those _cycles_
could be more profitable than ignoring them. This might be because
working a _cycle_, you might never have to travel empty.

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

The Traveller rules left out a lot of things that have become common
today. In particular, containerized cargo was just becoming really big
in the world in the 1970s and 1980s. My imagination says that those
lessons aren't lost as we become a spacefaring society.

Also, the revisions to the Traveller rules obsoleted a bunch of CT
canon. In my opinion, the biggest loser here was book two designed
ships. I cannot imagine that every ship in the Imperium doesn't have a
jump-governor and a fuel purification plant. The economic value of
these two pieces of equipment is just too high for them not to be
cheap and thus common. Also, unless there's some hidden downside to
Book 5 designed ships that makes them suitable for military use only,
I can't imagine a Book 2 Type S holding it's value against the exact
same ship designed to Book 5. I find this true for all of the Book 2
designs. Even then, the Navy has logistics problems. It's going to
have a set of cargo hauler and courier designs that would be both
vastly more profitable and more capable than their Book 2 civilian
equivalents. If the Navy ever decides to sell some of these designs as
surplus, one can imagine them taking over the market.

--
Chris

      __o          "All I was trying to do was get home from work."
    _`\<,_           -Rosa Parks
___(*)/_(*)____.___o____..___..o...________ooO..._____________________
Christopher Sean Hilton                    [chris/at/vindaloo/dot/com]