[TML] Space Traffic Control (was Re: War rules)

[Knapp]

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:45 AM, <shadow at shadowgard.com> wrote:

> On 1 Jun 2008 at 18:58, Knapp wrote:
>
> > I was reading all that bit about what would happen to a ship if it
> > hit some poor planet. I started thinking about what would happen to
> > the planet if some great ship hit it, or even some little cargo ship
> > that was loaded and had a long vector.
>
>
> Rough rule of thumb. At 3 km/sec, a ship will impact with an energy
> of roughly the same mass of TNT. This goes up linearly with mass (ie
> ten times the mass is ten times the boom) and goes up as the *square*
> of the velocity (ie at ten times the velocity you get 100 times the
> boom).
>
> So at 300 km/sec, a 100 ton *mass* (not 100 dT!) ship will impact
> with roughly one megaton of blast.
>
> That's bad news near the impact point but not so nad even a dozen
> miles away (the fallout won't be radioactive unless the ship was
> carrying nukes).


You will have dust too and that can go from no problem to a long night or
climate change. This is a good example of a Legal vector VS one that is just
stupid. Really big war ships doing really high speeds can risk the whole
planet. I was also thinking about what would happen if, say two cargo ships
hit. The huge type with 100,000 cargo containers each. Now you have 200,000
cargo containers raining down on the planet. Obliviously a worst case
scenario. Perhaps cargo containers could have safety parachutes or
something. Even on Earth they are a large problem for boaters.


>
>
> But planets are big. And unless it's got an insane population density
> the odds of hitting anywhere important are low.


A nice big wave could do a lot of damage to coastal areas. Living in the USA
I could see thinking this way but living in Germany, I can't think of any
place that it would be OK to have a large, fast war ship fall.


> > So if I lived on that planet I would have rules about what vectors were
> OK,
> > they would have to be vectors that, if the ship failed, would give people
> at
> > least 3 weeks go find aid or maybe less if aid was always in system. This
> > goes double for war ships and war. Say you are fight for or even against
> a
> > plant, loose ship control and then clash into the major city or really
> harm
> > the planet. What good is the fight then? Seems to be that it would be a
> war
> > crime to take such a vector in the first place.
>
> I covered this several times over the years. This falls under the
> general responsibilities of "Space Traffic Control" or STC (much like
> ATC/Air Traffic Control here on Earth).
>
> In wartime, all bets are off. Surving the battle is more important
> than where your ship might end up if you lose control.
>
> Good examples are all the planes that crashed into cities *by
> accident) (ie loss of control or got shot down as opposed to kamikaze
> type stuff) during WWII. And all the antiaircraft fire that hit
> civilians.
>
> Classic example of that last is Pearl Harbor. A lot of the shells
> fired at the attacking planes weren't properly fused and landed in
> Honolulu. Nobody got in trouble for that.
>
> In peacetime, you'll be given a course that does not intersect the
> planet (except on landing approach) or any other ships or space
> installation (unless preparing to dock).
>
> This will include not merely your projected path under power, but
> also your path if you *lose* power at any point.





>
> The three weeks bit is totally silly as with normal Traveller drives,
> you can leave the star system in 3 weeks.
>
> In 3 weeks at one g you can travel almost 110 AU (without doing
> turnover). And you'll be travelling at 6% of c!!!


You miss the point of 3 weeks. This is with the thinking that there is
nothing in system that can stop the disaster. Perhaps they were all shot
down or whatever. So that mean you must jump out of system, get help, return
and fix or tug the ship out of danger. It is the outside number.
Obliviously, if we are talking a tanker at a big spaceport that needs help
they will get in in hours if not minutes.



>
> Anyway, STC will contact ships that come out of jump and are "near"
> the planet. If you emerge in the middle of nowhere (ie well away from
> any planet of station having significant space traffic), you may get
> hailed by system control and asked what you areplanning to do and if
> you need help.
>
> If you are outside of any STC control center's area of operations,
> you'll be pretty much on your own. They'll ask for your intended
> destination and suggest where and when you should enter your
> destination's controlled flight area (if they have an STC).
>
> If they don't (say a non-mainworld with some mining installations or
> the like) you'll probably just get given the unicom frequency(ies)
> for your destination and get fed an update on any local traffic
> hazards. (this is analogous to flying into a small airport or private
> field here in the states)
>
> If you are heading for controlled space (or already in it, as some
> worlds may have controled zones that extend past their 100 diameter
> limit) you'll get assigned a transponder squawk and a channel to talk
> to STC on.
>
> You'll then get given some exacting course instructions on that
> channel once you are in or near the controlled area.
>
> If you follow the instructions, you'll likely not get contacted again
> until it's time to make a final approach to the station or planet.
> Unless of course, someone *else* screws up and you have to be re-
> routed or dodge.
>
> If you don't follow instructions, you'll get a warning or two (if you
> are at a relatively safe distance or vector). They you'll hear a
> "change course or be fired upon" by the local COAC (Close Orbit &
> Aerospace Command). And they *will* folow thru on it.
>
> If you are too close and on a dangerous vector they'll go straight to
> the COAC warning. Or even skip that and start shooting if you are
> really close and on an intercept vector.
>
> Unless you can prove equipment failure, your pilot may get his
> license jerked. Likewise, the Captian (if he wasn't the one piloting)
> may have his Master's papers at risk.
>
> And if it was equipment failure, the Captain will have to answer. Not
> sure if they'd go after the chief engineer as well or let the
> Captain/owner deal with that on their own.
>
> STC is very serious about this. About as serious as airport security
> is about a bomb threat.
>
> ps. I'd like to expand on this, so anybody with experience operating
> a plane or running ATC *especially* outside the US, please feel free
> to talk to me.
>
> And I could use some illustrations to show controlled vs uncontolled
> space in a system and maybe some examples of good vs bad vectors.
>
>
>
> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
> shadow at shadowgard dot com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TML mailing list
> TML at travellercentral.com
> http://lists.travellercentral.com/mailman/listinfo/tml
>



-- 
Douglas E Knapp

1. Sun Tzu said: Raising a host of a hundred thousand
men and marching them great distances entails heavy loss
on the people and a drain on the resources of the State.
The daily expenditure will amount to a thousand ounces
of silver. There will be commotion at home and abroad,
and men will drop down exhausted on the highways.
As many as seven hundred thousand families will be impeded
in their labor.

2. Hostile armies may face each other for years,
striving for the victory which is decided in a single day.
This being so, to remain in ignorance of the enemy's
condition simply because one grudges the outlay of a hundred
ounces of silver in honors and emoluments, is the height
of inhumanity.