Johannes replied to me: > A shuttle would transport only the cargo of that run, plus passangers and > crew with fairly shortterm occupancy. A station would have to haul much > more mass and volume around, which means big drives that have to be paid > and (depending in the drive) high fuel costs.
A good point. Reaction drives and FTL? I'm always tempted to say that reactionless thrusters are "easier" than stardrives, especially since VE2nd put FTL at TL10 instead of late TL9. > A drive malefunction in a > station would have a serious impact on the trade to and from the system, > while it's easier to have enough retundancy in shuttles. There could be redundant drives on the station. > There might also > be reasons to keep a station at a certain distance to the main planet, to > keep transfer between the station and the planet short. That sounds like one station per system. That makes good sense for games. Regards, Onno _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
